On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 21:45, Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2024, Dipendra Khadka wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 20:55, Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2024, Ming-Hung Tsai wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 12:47 AM Dipendra Khadka <kdipendra88@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Smatch reported following:
> > > > > '''
> > > > > drivers/md/dm-cache-target.c:3204 parse_cblock_range() warn: sscanf doesn't return error codes
> > > > > drivers/md/dm-cache-target.c:3217 parse_cblock_range() warn: sscanf doesn't return error codes
> > > > > '''
> > > > >
> > > > > Since, the only negative value that is returned by sscanf is -1.
> > > > > Returning -ENVAL when sscanf returns -1.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Dipendra Khadka <kdipendra88@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > drivers/md/dm-cache-target.c | 8 ++++----
> > > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-cache-target.c b/drivers/md/dm-cache-target.c
> > > > > index 17f0fab1e254..c35d65e310d6 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/md/dm-cache-target.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/md/dm-cache-target.c
> > > > > @@ -3200,8 +3200,8 @@ static int parse_cblock_range(struct cache *cache, const char *str,
> > > > > * Try and parse form (ii) first.
> > > > > */
> > > > > r = sscanf(str, "%llu-%llu%c", &b, &e, &dummy);
> > > > > - if (r < 0)
> > > > > - return r;
> > > > > + if (r == -1)
> > > > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > > >
> > > > > if (r == 2) {
> > > > > result->begin = to_cblock(b);
> > > > > @@ -3213,8 +3213,8 @@ static int parse_cblock_range(struct cache *cache, const char *str,
> > > > > * That didn't work, try form (i).
> > > > > */
> > > > > r = sscanf(str, "%llu%c", &b, &dummy);
> > > > > - if (r < 0)
> > > > > - return r;
> > > > > + if (r == -1)
> > > > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > > >
> > > > > if (r == 1) {
> > > > > result->begin = to_cblock(b);
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Could you please clarify how to reproduce unexpected results? From
> > > > what I observe, the kernel's sscanf doesn't return -1 on an empty
> > > > input. Even if a negative value other than -EINVAL is returned, it is
> > > > handled by the callers.
> > > >
> > > > Hank
> > >
> > > I applied the patch, but I deleted the conditions "if (r == -1) return
> > > -EINVAL;"
> > >
> > > sscanf in the kernel doesn't return negative numbers.
> > >
> >
> > Do I have to send v2 with
> > if (r != 2)
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > or what should I do now?
> > > Mikulas
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Dipendra
>
> You can do nothing :)
>
> I fixed the patch and I'll send it to Linus in this merge window.
>
Oh, ok. Thank you for your time.
> Mikulas
Best Regards,
Dipendra.
