From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steve Dickson Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfs-utils: Removed a number of warn_unused_result warnings Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:51:51 -0400 Message-ID: <49C91DB7.1050006@RedHat.com> References: <49C797C6.8030102@RedHat.com> <654687AD-E743-45A4-99B1-BBBEAA5D915D@oracle.com> <49C910C3.2090700@RedHat.com> <74BEB80C-976E-48D5-B356-16534F210209@oracle.com> <49C91A2F.90501@RedHat.com> <44414CBB-0EF8-4B6E-A972-D4500440128B@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Linux NFS Mailing list To: Chuck Lever Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:59215 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759080AbZCXRyu (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:54:50 -0400 In-Reply-To: <44414CBB-0EF8-4B6E-A972-D4500440128B@oracle.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Chuck Lever wrote: >>>>> Also, note that you can use the "%m" format specifier to generate the >>>>> same string you get from strerror(errno). >>>> Yeah.. I knew that... but I thought there some memory corruption >>>> or service denial issue with using "%m" so I've always stuck >>>> with '%d (%s)'. >>> >>> I use %m routinely. What exactly are these issues? >> It was a while ago... but I seem to remember there as an issue >> with one of the daemons using '%m'.. I want to say a buffer overflow >> but I just don't remember... It was probably some funky way '%m' >> was being used...since I sure the normal every day use of '%m" >> is fine... > > I'm not a security expert, but I can't see how that could be a problem > for generating log messages (especially any message that precedes a > daemon's exit). I'd like to continue using "%m" with xlog() in my own > patches for the time being. Is that OK with you? Sure.. I have no problem with that... steved.