Re: [PATCH v6 5/6] rust: str: add radix prefixed integer parsing functions

[Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@kernel.org>]

"Gary Guo" <gary@garyguo.net> writes:

> On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 16:57:39 +0100
> Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>> Add the trait `ParseInt` for parsing string representations of integers
>> where the string representations are optionally prefixed by a radix
>> specifier. Implement the trait for the primitive integer types.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@kernel.org>
>> ---
>>  rust/kernel/str.rs | 111 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 111 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/rust/kernel/str.rs b/rust/kernel/str.rs
>> index c102adac32757..192cd0ff5974f 100644
>> --- a/rust/kernel/str.rs
>> +++ b/rust/kernel/str.rs
>> @@ -945,3 +945,114 @@ fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
>>  macro_rules! fmt {
>>      ($($f:tt)*) => ( core::format_args!($($f)*) )
>>  }
>> +
>> +pub mod parse_int {
>> +    //! Integer parsing functions for parsing signed and unsigned integers
>> +    //! potentially prefixed with `0x`, `0o`, or `0b`.
>> +
>> +    use crate::alloc::flags;
>> +    use crate::prelude::*;
>> +    use crate::str::BStr;
>> +    use core::ops::Deref;
>> +
>> +    /// Trait that allows parsing a [`&BStr`] to an integer with a radix.
>> +    ///
>> +    /// [`&BStr`]: kernel::str::BStr
>> +    // This is required because the `from_str_radix` function on the primitive
>> +    // integer types is not part of any trait.
>> +    pub trait FromStrRadix: Sized {
>> +        /// Parse `src` to `Self` using radix `radix`.
>> +        fn from_str_radix(src: &BStr, radix: u32) -> Result<Self, crate::error::Error>;
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    /// Extract the radix from an integer literal optionally prefixed with
>> +    /// one of `0x`, `0X`, `0o`, `0O`, `0b`, `0B`, `0`.
>> +    fn strip_radix(src: &BStr) -> (u32, &BStr) {
>> +        match src.deref() {
>> +            [b'0', b'x' | b'X', ..] => (16, &src[2..]),
>
> This can be written as
>
> 	[b'0', b'x' | b'X', rest @ ..] => (16, rest),
>
> to avoid manual indexing. Same for o and b below.

error[E0308]: mismatched types
   --> /home/aeh/src/linux-rust/module-params/rust/kernel/str.rs:972:52
    |
972 |             [b'0', b'x' | b'X', rest @ ..] => (16, rest),
    |                                                    ^^^^ expected `&BStr`, found `&[u8]`
    |
    = note: expected reference `&BStr`
               found reference `&[u8]`

But I guess I could use the new AsRef impl. Or is it more idiomatic to
implement `From<&[u8]> for &BStr` and go with `rest.into()`?

>
>> +            [b'0', b'o' | b'O', ..] => (8, &src[2..]),
>> +            [b'0', b'b' | b'B', ..] => (2, &src[2..]),
>> +            [b'0', ..] => (8, src),
>
> Perhaps add a comment saying that this isn't using `src[1..]` so `0`
> can be parsed.

Good idea.

>
>> +            _ => (10, src),
>> +        }
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    /// Trait for parsing string representations of integers.
>> +    ///
>> +    /// Strings beginning with `0x`, `0o`, or `0b` are parsed as hex, octal, or
>> +    /// binary respectively. Strings beginning with `0` otherwise are parsed as
>> +    /// octal. Anything else is parsed as decimal. A leading `+` or `-` is also
>> +    /// permitted. Any string parsed by [`kstrtol()`] or [`kstrtoul()`] will be
>> +    /// successfully parsed.
>> +    ///
>> +    /// [`kstrtol()`]: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/core-api/kernel-api.html#c.kstrtol
>> +    /// [`kstrtoul()`]: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/core-api/kernel-api.html#c.kstrtoul
>> +    ///
>> +    /// # Example
>> +    /// ```
>> +    /// use kernel::str::parse_int::ParseInt;
>> +    /// use kernel::b_str;
>> +    ///
>> +    /// assert_eq!(Ok(0), u8::from_str(b_str!("0")));
>> +    ///
>> +    /// assert_eq!(Ok(0xa2u8), u8::from_str(b_str!("0xa2")));
>> +    /// assert_eq!(Ok(-0xa2i32), i32::from_str(b_str!("-0xa2")));
>> +    ///
>> +    /// assert_eq!(Ok(-0o57i8), i8::from_str(b_str!("-0o57")));
>> +    /// assert_eq!(Ok(0o57i8), i8::from_str(b_str!("057")));
>> +    ///
>> +    /// assert_eq!(Ok(0b1001i16), i16::from_str(b_str!("0b1001")));
>> +    /// assert_eq!(Ok(-0b1001i16), i16::from_str(b_str!("-0b1001")));
>> +    ///
>> +    /// assert_eq!(Ok(127), i8::from_str(b_str!("127")));
>> +    /// assert!(i8::from_str(b_str!("128")).is_err());
>> +    /// assert_eq!(Ok(-128), i8::from_str(b_str!("-128")));
>> +    /// assert!(i8::from_str(b_str!("-129")).is_err());
>> +    /// assert_eq!(Ok(255), u8::from_str(b_str!("255")));
>> +    /// assert!(u8::from_str(b_str!("256")).is_err());
>> +    /// ```
>> +    pub trait ParseInt: FromStrRadix {
>> +        /// Parse a string according to the description in [`Self`].
>> +        fn from_str(src: &BStr) -> Result<Self> {
>> +            match src.iter().next() {
>> +                None => Err(EINVAL),
>> +                Some(sign @ b'-') | Some(sign @ b'+') => {
>> +                    let (radix, digits) = strip_radix(BStr::from_bytes(&src[1..]));
>> +                    let mut n_digits: KVec<u8> =
>> +                        KVec::with_capacity(digits.len() + 1, flags::GFP_KERNEL)?;
>> +                    n_digits.push(*sign, flags::GFP_KERNEL)?;
>> +                    n_digits.extend_from_slice(digits, flags::GFP_KERNEL)?;
>
> I think my comment from a previous series saying that this shouldn't
> need allocation is not addressed.

Thanks for noticing. This is the discussion from v4:

>> I don't think we should allocate for parsing. This can trivially be a
>> non-allocating. Just check that the next byte is an ASCII digit (reject
>> if so, in case people give multiple signs), and then from_str_radix and
>> return as is or use `checked_neg`.
>
>The issue with that approach is that 2s complement signed integer types
>of width `b` can assume values from -2^(b-1) to (2^(b-1))-1. We would
>reject the value -2^(b-1) when trying to parse as 2^(b-1).
>
>We could parse into an unsigned type, but it gets kind of clunky.
>
>Another option is to stop relying on `from_str_radix` from core and roll
>our own that takes sign as a separate function argument.

What is your take on that?


Best regards,
Andreas Hindborg