Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH 4/6] libsensors4: Use strtoul

[Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@hhs.nl>]

Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Hans,
> 
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:59:25 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Jean Delvare wrote:
>>> Use strtoul() instead of parsing integers on our own.
>> Erm, why all the < 0 checks on the return value of strtoul, are the variable in 
>> which the return value gets stored signed and can we have a wrap?
> 
> Yes, this is the reason why I added these "< 0" checks.
> 
>> In that case wouldn't it be better to first store in an unsigned long and then 
>> explicitly check the limits we want to enforce?
> 
> There's no specific limit I want to enforce, I only want to make sure
> that we don't end up with a negative value due to a possible wrap. This
> is pure paranoia, BTW, no sane user would ever trigger it. I agree that
> letting the overflow happen and checking for it afterwards isn't very
> elegant, but it works and it is efficient, so I am a bit reluctant to
> make the code more complex than it needs be.
> 
> I could probably use strtol instead of strtoul if you prefer, though.
> 

No its fine as is then.

Regards,

Hans


_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors