linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: iio: adt7316: replace sprintf() with sysfs

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20251116152800.4c1849cc@jic23-huawei>
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2025 15:28:00 +0000
From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Shi Hao <i.shihao.999@...il.com>, Michael.Hennerich@...log.com,
 lars@...afoo.de, dlechner@...libre.com, nuno.sa@...log.com,
 andy@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: iio: adt7316: replace sprintf() with
 sysfs_emit()

On Sun, 16 Nov 2025 13:08:07 +0200
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 12:16 PM Shi Hao <i.shihao.999@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > Convert several sprintf() calls to sysfs_emit() in the
> > sysfs show functions, as it is the preferred helper and
> > prevents potential buffer overruns.
> >
> > No functional changes intended.  
> 
> I briefly looked at it and see no issues,
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>
> 

Applied, but I will note that this driver is a long way from suitable
for moving out of staging and I would be surprised if more than
one or two of the lines changed in this patch make it through the
necessary refactors (should anyone actually have another go at
doing them).  Anyhow, I still think this is worth taking just to
reduce the noise of remaining instances of this.

I'd have deleted this long ago except I actually have one somewhere
and it one of the supported parts was still listed as suitable for
new designs when I checked not long ago.

ADI folk, I would like to hear if we should just delete this one.

Thanks,

Jonathan