* [PATCH] cpupower: replace atoi() with validated parse_int_range() helper
@ 2026-03-31 4:28 Kaushlendra Kumar
2026-03-31 23:53 ` Shuah Khan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Kaushlendra Kumar @ 2026-03-31 4:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: shuah, jwyatt, jkacur; +Cc: linux-pm, Kaushlendra Kumar
atoi() provides no error detection for invalid input or out-of-range
values. Introduce parse_int_range(), which uses strtol() with full
errno and end-pointer checking, returning -EINVAL on parse failure
and -ERANGE when the value falls outside the caller-supplied [min,
max] bounds.
Switch --perf-bias and --turbo-boost option parsing to use this
helper. Also move error messages from printf() to fprintf(stderr)
to follow standard CLI conventions for diagnostic output.
Signed-off-by: Kaushlendra Kumar <kaushlendra.kumar@intel.com>
---
tools/power/cpupower/utils/cpupower-set.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/power/cpupower/utils/cpupower-set.c b/tools/power/cpupower/utils/cpupower-set.c
index 550a942e72ce..dcbdff5c9ae5 100644
--- a/tools/power/cpupower/utils/cpupower-set.c
+++ b/tools/power/cpupower/utils/cpupower-set.c
@@ -31,6 +31,24 @@ static void print_wrong_arg_exit(void)
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
+/* Safe integer parsing with range validation. Returns 0 on success,
+ * -EINVAL on parse error, -ERANGE if value is outside [min, max].
+ */
+static int parse_int_range(const char *arg, int min, int max, int *out)
+{
+ char *end = NULL;
+ long val;
+
+ errno = 0;
+ val = strtol(arg, &end, 10);
+ if (errno || end == arg || *end != '\0')
+ return -EINVAL;
+ if (val < min || val > max)
+ return -ERANGE;
+ *out = (int)val;
+ return 0;
+}
+
int cmd_set(int argc, char **argv)
{
extern char *optarg;
@@ -69,10 +87,8 @@ int cmd_set(int argc, char **argv)
case 'b':
if (params.perf_bias)
print_wrong_arg_exit();
- perf_bias = atoi(optarg);
- if (perf_bias < 0 || perf_bias > 15) {
- printf(_("--perf-bias param out "
- "of range [0-%d]\n"), 15);
+ if (parse_int_range(optarg, 0, 15, &perf_bias)) {
+ fprintf(stderr, _("--perf-bias param out of range [0-%d]\n"), 15);
print_wrong_arg_exit();
}
params.perf_bias = 1;
@@ -100,9 +116,8 @@ int cmd_set(int argc, char **argv)
case 't':
if (params.turbo_boost)
print_wrong_arg_exit();
- turbo_boost = atoi(optarg);
- if (turbo_boost < 0 || turbo_boost > 1) {
- printf("--turbo-boost param out of range [0-1]\n");
+ if (parse_int_range(optarg, 0, 1, &turbo_boost)) {
+ fprintf(stderr, "--turbo-boost param out of range [0-1]\n");
print_wrong_arg_exit();
}
params.turbo_boost = 1;
--
2.34.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] cpupower: replace atoi() with validated parse_int_range() helper
2026-03-31 4:28 [PATCH] cpupower: replace atoi() with validated parse_int_range() helper Kaushlendra Kumar
@ 2026-03-31 23:53 ` Shuah Khan
2026-04-01 2:57 ` Kumar, Kaushlendra
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Shuah Khan @ 2026-03-31 23:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kaushlendra Kumar, shuah, jwyatt, jkacur; +Cc: linux-pm, Shuah Khan
On 3/30/26 22:28, Kaushlendra Kumar wrote:
> atoi() provides no error detection for invalid input or out-of-range
> values. Introduce parse_int_range(), which uses strtol() with full
> errno and end-pointer checking, returning -EINVAL on parse failure
> and -ERANGE when the value falls outside the caller-supplied [min,
> max] bounds.
>
> Switch --perf-bias and --turbo-boost option parsing to use this
> helper. Also move error messages from printf() to fprintf(stderr)
> to follow standard CLI conventions for diagnostic output.
What errors are you seeing?
>
> Signed-off-by: Kaushlendra Kumar <kaushlendra.kumar@intel.com>
> ---
> tools/power/cpupower/utils/cpupower-set.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/power/cpupower/utils/cpupower-set.c b/tools/power/cpupower/utils/cpupower-set.c
> index 550a942e72ce..dcbdff5c9ae5 100644
> --- a/tools/power/cpupower/utils/cpupower-set.c
> +++ b/tools/power/cpupower/utils/cpupower-set.c
> @@ -31,6 +31,24 @@ static void print_wrong_arg_exit(void)
> exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
> }
>
> +/* Safe integer parsing with range validation. Returns 0 on success,
> + * -EINVAL on parse error, -ERANGE if value is outside [min, max].
> + */
> +static int parse_int_range(const char *arg, int min, int max, int *out)
> +{
> + char *end = NULL;
> + long val;
> +
> + errno = 0;
> + val = strtol(arg, &end, 10);
> + if (errno || end == arg || *end != '\0')
> + return -EINVAL;
> + if (val < min || val > max)
> + return -ERANGE;
> + *out = (int)val;
> + return 0;
> +}
Adding a routine like this is not the right direction
because it adds code that needs to be maintained.
> +
> int cmd_set(int argc, char **argv)
> {
> extern char *optarg;
> @@ -69,10 +87,8 @@ int cmd_set(int argc, char **argv)
> case 'b':
> if (params.perf_bias)
> print_wrong_arg_exit();
> - perf_bias = atoi(optarg);
> - if (perf_bias < 0 || perf_bias > 15) {
> - printf(_("--perf-bias param out "
> - "of range [0-%d]\n"), 15);
The above logic range checks on perf_bias - Is there a problem
in this logic?
> + if (parse_int_range(optarg, 0, 15, &perf_bias)) {
> + fprintf(stderr, _("--perf-bias param out of range [0-%d]\n"), 15);
> print_wrong_arg_exit();
> }
> params.perf_bias = 1;
> @@ -100,9 +116,8 @@ int cmd_set(int argc, char **argv)
> case 't':
> if (params.turbo_boost)
> print_wrong_arg_exit();
> - turbo_boost = atoi(optarg);
> - if (turbo_boost < 0 || turbo_boost > 1) {
> - printf("--turbo-boost param out of range [0-1]\n");
> + if (parse_int_range(optarg, 0, 1, &turbo_boost)) {
> + fprintf(stderr, "--turbo-boost param out of range [0-1]\n");
> print_wrong_arg_exit();
> }
> params.turbo_boost = 1;
I am not convinced there is need for a new routine to do the checks.
thanks,
-- Shuah
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] cpupower: replace atoi() with validated parse_int_range() helper
2026-03-31 23:53 ` Shuah Khan
@ 2026-04-01 2:57 ` Kumar, Kaushlendra
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Kumar, Kaushlendra @ 2026-04-01 2:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Shuah Khan, shuah@kernel.org, jwyatt@redhat.com,
jkacur@redhat.com
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
On 3/30/26 22:28, Shuah Khan wrote:
> Adding a routine like this is not the right direction because it adds
> code that needs to be maintained.
> I am not convinced there is need for a new routine to do the checks.
Agreed.
> The above logic range checks on perf_bias - Is there a problem in
> this logic?
No, there is no problem with the existing range check logic.
We will revert to the original approach.
Thanks,
Kaushlendra Kumar
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-04-01 2:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-03-31 4:28 [PATCH] cpupower: replace atoi() with validated parse_int_range() helper Kaushlendra Kumar
2026-03-31 23:53 ` Shuah Khan
2026-04-01 2:57 ` Kumar, Kaushlendra
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox