Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] lib: introduce simple error-checking wrapper for memparse()

Carlos Maiolino
2026-01-09T12:53:11Z

On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 09:55:27AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 09:42:42AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 09:06:49 -0800 Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 07:52:15PM +0300, Dmitry Antipov wrote:
> > > > Introduce 'memvalue()' which uses 'memparse()' to parse a string
> > > > with optional memory suffix into a non-negative number. If parsing
> > > > has succeeded, returns 0 and stores the result at the location
> > > > specified by the second argument. Otherwise returns -EINVAL and
> > > > leaves the location untouched.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
> > > > Suggested-by: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Antipov <dmantipov@yandex.ru>
> > >
> > > LGTM, thanks!
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
> >
> > Thanks, I'll add both these to mm.git's mm-nonmm-unstable branch for
> > testing.
> >
> > If XFS people would prefer to take [2/2] via the xfs tree then please
> > lmk and I'll send it over when [1/2] is upstreamed. Or we can take
> > both patches via the xfs tree. Or something. Sending out an acked-by:
> > would be simplest!
>
> I assumed this would go via xfs tree, but I'm happy to do whatever.

Particularly I find it much simpler to have those inter-dependent
patches to go through in a single series via a single tree, instead of
breaking them apart and create merge dependencies.

As long as xfs list is in the loop I particularly don't mind. Thanks for
pulling it Andrew.

Carlos

>
> --
> Kees Cook
>