On Wed, 2021-02-03 at 16:43 +0800, Jiapeng Chong wrote: > Fix the following coccicheck warning: > > ./drivers/scsi/isci/init.c:140:8-16: WARNING: use scnprintf or > sprintf. > > Reported-by: Abaci Robot<abaci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Jiapeng Chong <jiapeng.chong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/scsi/isci/init.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/isci/init.c b/drivers/scsi/isci/init.c > index c452849..741a98e 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/isci/init.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/isci/init.c > @@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ static ssize_t isci_show_id(struct device *dev, > struct device_attribute *attr, c > struct sas_ha_struct *sas_ha = SHOST_TO_SAS_HA(shost); > struct isci_host *ihost = container_of(sas_ha, typeof(*ihost), > sas_ha); > > - return snprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%d\n", ihost->id); > + return sysfs_emit(buf, "%d\n", ihost->id); What's the point of doing this change? We'd have to have 13,600 bit integer types before this could ever possibly overflow and the difference between snprintf and scnprintf actually matter from a practical point of view. Perhaps the coccinelle check should be updated to account for these common impossible to overflow situations. James
