On Mon, Apr 4, 2022 at 11:24 PM Yuntao Wang <ytcoode@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> There are some issues in parse_num_list():
>
> First, the end variable is assigned twice when parsing_end is true, it is
> unnecessary.
>
> Second, the function does not check that parsing_end is false after parsing
> argument. Thus, if the final part of the argument is something like '4-',
> parse_num_list() will discard it instead of returning -EINVAL.
>
> Clean up parse_num_list() and fix these issues.
>
> Before:
>
> $ ./test_progs -n 2,4-
> #2 atomic_bounds:OK
> Summary: 1/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
>
> After:
>
> $ ./test_progs -n 2,4-
> Failed to parse test numbers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yuntao Wang <ytcoode@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v1 -> v2: add more details to commit message
>
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/testing_helpers.c | 18 +++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/testing_helpers.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/testing_helpers.c
> index 795b6798ccee..82f0e2d99c23 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/testing_helpers.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/testing_helpers.c
> @@ -20,16 +20,16 @@ int parse_num_list(const char *s, bool **num_set, int *num_set_len)
> if (errno)
> return -errno;
>
> - if (parsing_end)
> - end = num;
> - else
> + if (!parsing_end) {
> start = num;
> + if (*next == '-') {
> + s = next + 1;
> + parsing_end = true;
> + continue;
> + }
> + }
>
> - if (!parsing_end && *next == '-') {
> - s = next + 1;
> - parsing_end = true;
> - continue;
> - } else if (*next == ',') {
I think the new structure of the code is actually harder to follow and
there is no need to change this code in the first place just to
optimize away parsing_end assignmet.
> + if (*next == ',') {
> parsing_end = false;
> s = next + 1;
> end = num;
> @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ int parse_num_list(const char *s, bool **num_set, int *num_set_len)
> set[i] = true;
> }
>
> - if (!set)
> + if (!set || parsing_end)
> return -EINVAL;
>
this is a real fix, please submit just and drop the first part of the patch
> *num_set = set;
> --
> 2.35.1
>
