On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:33:27AM +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > - if (sscanf(buf, "%d", &config) != 1 || config < 0 || config > 1)
> > + if (sscanf(buf, "%d", &val) != 1 || val < 0 || val > 1)
> > return -EINVAL;
>
> Not directly related to this patch, but a question I started wondering
> about recently: Is there some generic guideline wrt parsing boolean
> flags in sysfs? If not, shouldn't there be?
>
> I see a lot of different approaches implementing this basic function.
> Personally I would prefer if they all did something like the
> set_usb2_hardware_lpm in drivers/usb/core/sysfs.c:
>
> static ssize_t
> set_usb2_hardware_lpm(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> const char *buf, size_t count)
> {
> struct usb_device *udev = to_usb_device(dev);
> bool value;
> int ret;
>
> usb_lock_device(udev);
>
> ret = strtobool(buf, &value);
>
> if (!ret)
> ret = usb_set_usb2_hardware_lpm(udev, value);
>
> usb_unlock_device(udev);
>
> if (!ret)
> return count;
>
> return ret;
> }
>
>
>
> Using strtobool() to allow "Y", "yes", "1" etc makes a nice user
> interface IMHO. Unless of course the variable is a true integer which
> only happens to currently allow 0 and 1, but may be extended with more
> values later.
Yes, using that function should be encouraged.
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
