netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/5] net/mac80211/debugfs.c: use kstrtoul, etc

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1111071258160.2527@hadrien>
Date:	Mon, 7 Nov 2011 12:58:35 +0100 (CET)
From:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:	Eliad Peller <eliad@...ery.com>
cc:	Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] net/mac80211/debugfs.c: use kstrtoul, etc



On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Eliad Peller wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk> wrote:
>> From: Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
>>
>> Use kstrtoul, etc instead of the now deprecated strict_strtoul, etc.
>>
>> A semantic patch rule for the kstrtoul case is as follows:
>> (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
>>
>> // <smpl>
>> @@
>> expression a,b;
>> {int,long} *c;
>> @@
>>
>> -strict_strtoul
>> +kstrtoul
>>  (a,b,c)
>> // </smpl>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
>>
>> ---
>>  net/mac80211/debugfs.c |    2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff -u -p a/net/mac80211/debugfs.c b/net/mac80211/debugfs.c
>> --- a/net/mac80211/debugfs.c
>> +++ b/net/mac80211/debugfs.c
>> @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ static ssize_t uapsd_max_sp_len_write(st
>>                return -EFAULT;
>>        buf[len] = '\0';
>>
>> -       ret = strict_strtoul(buf, 0, &val);
>> +       ret = kstrtoul(buf, 0, &val);
>>
>>        if (ret)
>>                return -EINVAL;
>>
>
> maybe while cleaning it up change copy_from_user +
> strict_stroul/kstroul -> kstroul_from_user?

Thanks for the suggestion.  I will look into it.

julia