From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FF32C433E0 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 10:41:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6F6520B1F for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 10:41:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729261AbhAKKlM (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 05:41:12 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001ae601.pphosted.com ([67.231.152.168]:10406 "EHLO mx0b-001ae601.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726594AbhAKKlL (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 05:41:11 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0077474.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001ae601.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 10BAaMBm007129; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 04:39:56 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cirrus.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=PODMain02222019; bh=d75rPZz6XfMRGET+XeZnq7haDjcGG9W0zaixbxQsXDo=; b=LQeQSL+GVTnq8hrA7FJamx64yiJNaDzZSgLSmSX0CDrj/NUCdYkmk5WSmXPdHiHbRFsH 1/5UkdYJLDIcHUfhYjySI/rEAP4TDeRQlzQMvsEeQeEDnsHL7nJnvpnKvYThDQiC6pB7 WM2uIn4dxrjk2iYH8pnvbHqQVcI0wnR5Ot9jKDa2cDVPExyUbSUrZ4x2kpVfNxf43OxV 28ZZ5XrWfl6wbQMyr73/uhNoLNzVLcbDbo+IHM9cS1Er6W8Lr556/xm2yerTcGepPTne QOOPlw5qzKkSc84Yc73c/64n5k78gKyXWmCoeY2vhq2IElzUY2oNR3kereWY2I2SWEsv zA== Received: from ediex02.ad.cirrus.com ([87.246.76.36]) by mx0b-001ae601.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 35y9srsyd4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 04:39:56 -0600 Received: from EDIEX01.ad.cirrus.com (198.61.84.80) by EDIEX02.ad.cirrus.com (198.61.84.81) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 10:39:54 +0000 Received: from ediswmail.ad.cirrus.com (198.61.86.93) by EDIEX01.ad.cirrus.com (198.61.84.80) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.1.1913.5 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 10:39:54 +0000 Received: from [10.0.2.15] (AUSNPC0LSNW1.ad.cirrus.com [198.61.65.3]) by ediswmail.ad.cirrus.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79BE845; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 10:39:54 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] lib: vsprintf: scanf: Negative number must have field width > 1 To: Andy Shevchenko , Petr Mladek CC: Steven Rostedt , Sergey Senozhatsky , Shuah Khan , , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , Andy Shevchenko , Rasmus Villemoes References: <20201217180057.23786-1-rf@opensource.cirrus.com> From: Richard Fitzgerald Message-ID: Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 10:39:56 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=687 impostorscore=0 clxscore=1011 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2101110063 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org On 11/01/2021 10:36, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 12:28 PM Petr Mladek wrote: >> >> Sigh, I have just realized that Andy and Rasmus, the other >> vsprintf maintainers and reviewers, were not in CC. >> I am sorry for not noticing this earlier. >> >> The patchset is ready for 5.12 from my POV. > > Thanks, Petr! > > I have one question, do we have a test case for that? If not, I prefer > defer until a test case will be provided. > See patch 3, numbers_prefix_overflow()