From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: jason@lakedaemon.net (Jason Cooper)
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 11:03:18 -0500
Subject: [PATCH V2 2/8] string: fix strncmp function
In-Reply-To: <52B193BE.1080206@gmail.com>
References: <1386767259-15693-1-git-send-email-p.wilczek@samsung.com>
 <1387368551-18958-1-git-send-email-p.wilczek@samsung.com>
 <1387368551-18958-3-git-send-email-p.wilczek@samsung.com>
 <20131218121551.GH4360@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <52B193BE.1080206@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20131218160318.GQ2609@titan.lakedaemon.net>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Daniel,

On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 01:23:26PM +0100, Daniel Mack wrote:
> On 12/18/2013 01:15 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 01:09:05PM +0100, Piotr Wilczek wrote:
> >> Now function returns the number of characters that differ in the
> >> compared strings.
> > 
> > I think this is a mistake.  You're defining a standard C function in
> > a non-standard way.  For strcmp() and strncmp(), the C standard
> > requires:
> > 
> > RETURN VALUE
> >        The strcmp() and strncmp() functions return an integer less than, equal
> >        to, or greater than zero if s1 (or the first n bytes thereof) is found,
> >        respectively, to be less than, to match, or be greater than s2.
> > 
> > If you implement something different to that, don't call it strcmp() or
> > strncmp() but something else, because you're not providing the correct
> > functionality, and that will just confuse people and lead to bugs.
> 
> True.
> 
> > For instance, can you be sure that there aren't any uses of strncmp()
> > which already test for less-than-zero etc?
> 
> In this case, yes. The code as it stands is very small, and users only
> check for the return value of these functions to be 0.
> 
> But I wonder whether that patch is needed at all. At least the rest of
> this series does not even seem to introduce new call sites of strcmp()
> or strncmp() ...

Go ahead and drop this one.  I'll do a patch to fix this and remove
those heinous parentheses.  :)

thx,

Jason.