netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] iplink_rmnet: Allow passing IFLA_RMNET

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: <eca394ee-04c3-2d33-2c82-1f3360211845@linaro.org>
Date:   Mon, 27 Sep 2021 17:44:33 -0500
From:   Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Daniele Palmas <dnlplm@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iplink_rmnet: Allow passing IFLA_RMNET_FLAGS

On 9/27/21 8:48 AM, David Ahern wrote:
>>   		} else if (matches(*argv, "help") == 0) {
>>   			explain();
>>   			return -1;
> use strcmp for new options. Also, please use 'csum' instead of 'chksum'
> in the names. csum is already widely used in ip commands.

On the csum remark, I agree completely.

On the other:  Are you saying to use strcmp() instead of
matches()?

That seems strange to me because matches() is used *much*
more often than strcmp(), and handles an empty *argv
differently.

I don't disagree with your suggested change, but upon
looking at the other code it surprises me a bit.  Can
you provide a little more explanation?  If you mean
something else, please clarify.  Thanks.

					-Alex