| Message ID | 001501ce5e9a$15731080$40593180$@samsung.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Jingoo Han <jg1.han@samsung.com> wrote: > The usage of strict_strtoul() is not preferred, because > strict_strtoul() is obsolete. Thus, kstrtoul() should be > used. > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2123.c > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2123.c > @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static ssize_t pcf2123_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, > > r = container_of(attr, struct pcf2123_sysfs_reg, attr); > > - if (strict_strtoul(r->name, 16, ®)) > + if (kstrtoul(r->name, 16, ®)) > return -EINVAL; ret = kstrtoul(...); if (ret) return ret; > @@ -117,8 +117,7 @@ static ssize_t pcf2123_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, > > r = container_of(attr, struct pcf2123_sysfs_reg, attr); > > - if (strict_strtoul(r->name, 16, ®) > - || strict_strtoul(buffer, 10, &val)) > + if (kstrtoul(r->name, 16, ®) || kstrtoul(buffer, 10, &val)) > return -EINVAL; I see no harm to allow user to write octal values as well. Thus, just ret = kstrtoul(r->name, 0, ®); if (ret) return ret; Alessandro, what do you think? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
On Sunday, June 02, 2013 8:56 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Jingoo Han <jg1.han@samsung.com> wrote: > > The usage of strict_strtoul() is not preferred, because > > strict_strtoul() is obsolete. Thus, kstrtoul() should be > > used. > > > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2123.c > > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2123.c > > @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static ssize_t pcf2123_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, > > > > r = container_of(attr, struct pcf2123_sysfs_reg, attr); > > > > - if (strict_strtoul(r->name, 16, ®)) > > + if (kstrtoul(r->name, 16, ®)) > > return -EINVAL; > > ret = kstrtoul(...); > if (ret) > return ret; > > > @@ -117,8 +117,7 @@ static ssize_t pcf2123_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, > > > > r = container_of(attr, struct pcf2123_sysfs_reg, attr); > > > > - if (strict_strtoul(r->name, 16, ®) > > - || strict_strtoul(buffer, 10, &val)) > > + if (kstrtoul(r->name, 16, ®) || kstrtoul(buffer, 10, &val)) > > return -EINVAL; > > I see no harm to allow user to write octal values as well. > Thus, just > ret = kstrtoul(r->name, 0, ®); If you want to do this, please send another patch later, on top of this patch. I just want to address the replacing strict_strtoul() with kstrtoul(). Best regards, Jingoo Han > if (ret) > return ret; > > Alessandro, what do you think? > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko
diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2123.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2123.c index b2a78a0..4130e6b 100644 --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2123.c +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2123.c @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static ssize_t pcf2123_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, r = container_of(attr, struct pcf2123_sysfs_reg, attr); - if (strict_strtoul(r->name, 16, ®)) + if (kstrtoul(r->name, 16, ®)) return -EINVAL; txbuf[0] = PCF2123_READ | reg; @@ -117,8 +117,7 @@ static ssize_t pcf2123_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, r = container_of(attr, struct pcf2123_sysfs_reg, attr); - if (strict_strtoul(r->name, 16, ®) - || strict_strtoul(buffer, 10, &val)) + if (kstrtoul(r->name, 16, ®) || kstrtoul(buffer, 10, &val)) return -EINVAL; txbuf[0] = PCF2123_WRITE | reg;
The usage of strict_strtoul() is not preferred, because strict_strtoul() is obsolete. Thus, kstrtoul() should be used. Signed-off-by: Jingoo Han <jg1.han@samsung.com> --- drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2123.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)