linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 09/12] gpio: sim: new testing module

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YEZDod11xb0LT043@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 8 Mar 2021 17:32:49 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-doc <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/12] gpio: sim: new testing module

On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 04:13:33PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 4:05 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 03:23:31PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:

...

> > I have strong opinion not to open code "yet another parser".
> >
> > So, grepping on 'strsep(.*, ",")' shows a lot of code that wants something like
> > this. Interesting are the net/9p cases. This in particular pointed out to
> > lib/parser.c which in turn shows promising match_strlcpy() / match_strdup(). I
> > haven't looked deeply though.
> >
> > That said, I agree that next_arg() is not the best here.
> 
> Shall we revisit this once it's upstream with a generalization for
> separating comma separated strings?

How can we guarantee it won't be forgotten?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko