linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH linux-phy v2 1/4] string.h: Add str_has_proper

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Thu, 18 Aug 2022 22:56:14 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org>
Cc:     Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
        Linux Phy <linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>,
        Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>,
        josef.schlehofer@....cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-phy v2 1/4] string.h: Add str_has_proper_prefix()

On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 10:48 PM Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 22:10:58 +0300
> Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 11:06 PM Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org> wrote:

...

> > Besides not the good naming (what 'proper' means),
>
> The naming comes from similar naming in math: proper subset is as
> subset that is not equal to the superset. See
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substring :
>   "A proper prefix of a string is not equal to the string itself"

It's nice to learn something, but I still think that name has too
broad meaning(s) that may easily confuse the developers.

>
> > the entire function is not needed. You may simply call
> >
> >   str_has_prefix() && p[len] != '\0';
> >
> > Correct?
>
> Do you mean that I should implement this function to simply return
>   str_has_prefix() && p[len] != '\0'
> or that this function should not exist at all and I should do that in
> the code where I would have used the function?

The latter since this seems do not have users, except a single newcomer,

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko