On Thu, 23 Jul, at 06:30:17PM, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> >
> > Ricardo, any reason not change in parse_option_str general function?
> > I prefer to fix it in parse_option_str, because it is for checking
> > if str contains an option string, if str is NULL then it should
> > return false.
>
> Yes, I thought about it as well. I thought that this implementation
> aligns with what the majority of the param functions does. That was the
> main reason. But having this in parse_option_str might seem a better
> alternative if more param functions use it.
> >
> > But since it is only used in efi code for now so I have no strong opinion.
>
> Matt, do you have any specific preference?
Yeah, I like Ricardo's patch.
The problem with fixing this in parse_option_str() is that it would be
difficult to distinguish between "str is invalid" and "option wasn't
found in str". You'd have to start inspecting the return value to be
able to print a useful message in the caller, e.g.
ret = parse_option_str(str, "foobar");
if (ret == -EINVAL)
pr_err("No option provided for efi parameter");
if (ret == -ENOENT)
return; /* "foobar" not found */
etc.
Plus there's precedence for checking 'str' for NULL in early_param()
handlers.
--
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
