From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=r0+/=Q4=vger.kernel.org=linux-kernel-owner@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E842C43381
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:55:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67])
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69D6E2081B
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:55:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1727103AbfBUSzH (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 21 Feb 2019 13:55:07 -0500
Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:44652 "EHLO
        mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1726074AbfBUSzH (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 21 Feb 2019 13:55:07 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-73-223-200-170.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [73.223.200.170])
        by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CF4E0395F;
        Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:55:00 +0000 (UTC)
Date:   Thu, 21 Feb 2019 10:54:58 -0800
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc:     "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] test_firmware: silence underflow warning in
 test_dev_config_update_u8()
Message-Id: <20190221105458.409d1968961962079c54b815@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20190221183826.GA30993@kadam>
References: <20190221183700.GA1737@kadam>
        <20190221183826.GA30993@kadam>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 21:38:26 +0300 Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:

> We put an upper bound on "new" but we don't check for negatives.

U8_MAX has unsigned type, so `if (new > U8_MAX)' does check for negative.

> In
> this case the underflow doesn't matter very much, but we may as well
> make the static checker happy.
> 
> ...
>
> --- a/lib/test_firmware.c
> +++ b/lib/test_firmware.c
> @@ -326,15 +326,12 @@ static ssize_t test_dev_config_show_int(char *buf, int cfg)
>  static int test_dev_config_update_u8(const char *buf, size_t size, u8 *cfg)
>  {
>  	int ret;
> -	long new;
> +	u8 new;
>  
> -	ret = kstrtol(buf, 10, &new);
> +	ret = kstrtou8(buf, 10, &new);
>  	if (ret)
>  		return ret;
>  
> -	if (new > U8_MAX)
> -		return -EINVAL;
> -
>  	mutex_lock(&test_fw_mutex);
>  	*(u8 *)cfg = new;
>  	mutex_unlock(&test_fw_mutex);

if *buf=="257",

previous behavior: -EINVAL
new behavior: *cfg = 1

yes?

The old behavior seems better.