Skip to contentSkip to conversation

staging: lustre: replace simple_strtoul with kstrtoint

PATCH Superseded Marcin Ciupak 2 participants 3 messages Mar 9, 2017 – Mar 12, 2017 Staging

v1 of 2 Superseded Latest is v2 →

lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 staging: lustre: replace simple_strtoul with kstrtoint

Replace simple_strtoul with kstrtoint.
simple_strtoul is marked for obsoletion.

---
 drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/obd_mount.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/obd_mount.c +16 -4
index 8e0d4b1d86dc..4a604e9b3e49 100644
@@ -924,12 +924,24 @@ static int lmd_parse(char *options, struct lustre_mount_data *lmd)
 			lmd->lmd_flags |= LMD_FLG_ABORT_RECOV;
 			clear++;
 		} else if (strncmp(s1, "recovery_time_soft=", 19) == 0) {
-			lmd->lmd_recovery_time_soft = max_t(int,
-				simple_strtoul(s1 + 19, NULL, 10), time_min);
+			int res;
+
+			rc = kstrtoint(s1 + 19, 10, &res);
+			if (rc)
+				lmd->lmd_recovery_time_soft = time_min;
+			else
+				lmd->lmd_recovery_time_soft = max_t(int, res,
+								    time_min);
 			clear++;
 		} else if (strncmp(s1, "recovery_time_hard=", 19) == 0) {
-			lmd->lmd_recovery_time_hard = max_t(int,
-				simple_strtoul(s1 + 19, NULL, 10), time_min);
+			int res;
+
+			rc = kstrtoint(s1 + 19, 10, &res);
+			if (rc)
+				lmd->lmd_recovery_time_hard = time_min;
+			else
+				lmd->lmd_recovery_time_hard = max_t(int, res,
+								    time_min);
 			clear++;
 		} else if (strncmp(s1, "noir", 4) == 0) {
 			lmd->lmd_flags |= LMD_FLG_NOIR; /* test purpose only. */
Signature · 1 line
2.11.1
#1 lore raw
Quoted 1 line · Marcin Ciupak

Replace simple_strtoul with kstrtoint.

Why?

Quoted 15 lines

simple_strtoul is marked for obsoletion.

---
 drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/obd_mount.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/obd_mount.c +0 -0
index 8e0d4b1d86dc..4a604e9b3e49 100644
@@ -924,12 +924,24 @@ static int lmd_parse(char *options, struct lustre_mount_data *lmd)
 			lmd->lmd_flags |= LMD_FLG_ABORT_RECOV;
 			clear++;
 		} else if (strncmp(s1, "recovery_time_soft=", 19) == 0) {

drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/obd_mount.c static int lmd_parse(char *options, struct lustre_mount_data *lmd) · line 934

Quoted 10 lines
drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/obd_mount.c +8 -2
-			lmd->lmd_recovery_time_soft = max_t(int,
-				simple_strtoul(s1 + 19, NULL, 10), time_min);
+			int res;
+
+			rc = kstrtoint(s1 + 19, 10, &res);
+			if (rc)
+				lmd->lmd_recovery_time_soft = time_min;
+			else
+				lmd->lmd_recovery_time_soft = max_t(int, res,
+								    time_min);

Are you sure this is correct? Do you really want to use max_t()? Why is time_min used if there is an error? Can't this all be written a lot simpler to actually make it semi-sane?

thanks,

greg k-h

#2 lore raw
Quoted 4 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman
Quoted 1 line · Marcin Ciupak

Replace simple_strtoul with kstrtoint.

Why?

Because

Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line

simple_strtoul is marked for obsoletion.

as reported by checkpatch.pl.

Quoted 29 lines
Quoted 14 lines
---
 drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/obd_mount.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/obd_mount.c +0 -0
index 8e0d4b1d86dc..4a604e9b3e49 100644
@@ -924,12 +924,24 @@ static int lmd_parse(char *options, struct lustre_mount_data *lmd)
 			lmd->lmd_flags |= LMD_FLG_ABORT_RECOV;
 			clear++;
 		} else if (strncmp(s1, "recovery_time_soft=", 19) == 0) {

drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/obd_mount.c static int lmd_parse(char *options, struct lustre_mount_data *lmd) · line 934

Quoted 10 lines
drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/obd_mount.c +8 -2
-			lmd->lmd_recovery_time_soft = max_t(int,
-				simple_strtoul(s1 + 19, NULL, 10), time_min);
+			int res;
+
+			rc = kstrtoint(s1 + 19, 10, &res);
+			if (rc)
+				lmd->lmd_recovery_time_soft = time_min;
+			else
+				lmd->lmd_recovery_time_soft = max_t(int, res,
+								    time_min);

Are you sure this is correct? Do you really want to use max_t()? Why is time_min used if there is an error? Can't this all be written a lot simpler to actually make it semi-sane?

Quoted 3 lines

thanks,

greg k-h

max_t() and time_min were already used in the original code, I did not want to change that.

Regarding error handling, I saw two options here:
1. update variable with some fail-safe value and time_min looked good for that or,
2. do not update anything and do nothing or "goto invalid:" but I was not sure about that, so selected first option.

If first option is not the best one, what would be better in case of error handling?

Thanks,
Marcin