Reponses inline.
Luis - please have a look as well.
On 2020-02-21 10:30 a.m., Scott Branden wrote:
Hi Dan,
Thanks for your review and valuable comments.
Will have to investigate fully and correct anything wrong.
On 2020-02-20 12:42 a.m., Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 04:48:21PM -0800, Scott Branden wrote:
+static int test_dev_config_update_size_t(const char *buf,
+ size_t size,
+ size_t *cfg)
+{
+ int ret;
+ long new;
+
+ ret = kstrtol(buf, 10, &new);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ if (new > SIZE_MAX)
This "new" variable is long and SIZE_MAX is ULONG_MAX so the condition
can't be true.
Removed the check.
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ mutex_lock(&test_fw_mutex);
+ *(size_t *)cfg = new;
+ mutex_unlock(&test_fw_mutex);
+
+ /* Always return full write size even if we didn't consume all */
+ return size;
+}
+
+static ssize_t test_dev_config_show_size_t(char *buf, int cfg)
+{
+ size_t val;
+
+ mutex_lock(&test_fw_mutex);
+ val = cfg;
+ mutex_unlock(&test_fw_mutex);
Both val and cfg are stack variables so there is no need for locking.
Probably you meant to pass a pointer to cfg?
I am following the existing code as was done for
test_dev_config_show_bool(),
test_dev_config_show_int(),
test_dev_config_show_u8()
Mutex probably not needed but I don't think I need to deviate from the
rest of the test code.
Luis, could you please explain what the rest of your code is doing?
+
+ return snprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%zu\n", val);
+}
+
static ssize_t test_dev_config_show_int(char *buf, int cfg)
{
int val;
regards,
dan carpenter
