[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20230109235913.8ac99d54cff8b7c3fc5dcfa4@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2023 23:59:13 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To: Quanfa Fu <quanfafu@...il.com>
Cc: rostedt@...dmis.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] tracing/eprobe: no need to check for negative ret
value for snprintf
On Mon, 9 Jan 2023 12:06:25 +0800
Quanfa Fu <quanfafu@...il.com> wrote:
> No need to check for negative return value from snprintf() as the
> code does not return negative values.
>
Thanks for simplifying, this looks good to me.
Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Quanfa Fu <quanfafu@...il.com>
>
> -----
> V2 -> V3: continue to use snprintf
> V1 -> V2: memory allc uses kzalloc and replace snprintf with memcpy
> ---
> kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c | 12 ++++--------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c
> index 352b65e2b910..594ac1d086aa 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c
> @@ -923,17 +923,13 @@ static int trace_eprobe_parse_filter(struct trace_eprobe *ep, int argc, const ch
>
> p = ep->filter_str;
> for (i = 0; i < argc; i++) {
> - ret = snprintf(p, len, "%s ", argv[i]);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - goto error;
> - if (ret > len) {
> - ret = -E2BIG;
> - goto error;
> - }
> + if (i)
> + ret = snprintf(p, len, " %s", argv[i]);
> + else
> + ret = snprintf(p, len, "%s", argv[i]);
> p += ret;
> len -= ret;
> }
> - p[-1] = '\0';
>
> /*
> * Ensure the filter string can be parsed correctly. Note, this
> --
> 2.31.1
>
--
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists