Re: [PATCH 2/3] debugfs: move to new strtobool

[Jonathan Cameron <jic23@cam.ac.uk>]

On 04/19/11 21:30, Ryan Mallon wrote:
> On 04/19/2011 11:43 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> No functional changes requires that we eat errors from strtobool.
>> If people want to not do this, then it should be fixed at a later date.
> 
> May as well fix it now or it will get forgotten about. A second patch on
> top of this can fix the bug.
What worries me about this 'fix' is that it may well break some 'interesting'
bit of userspace code.  It would count as a userspace api change, be it
a fairly minor one.

Greg, do you thing it's worth returning an error on a non bool value?
> 
> ~Ryan
> 
>> V2: Simplification suggested by Rusty Russell removes the need for
>> additional variable ret.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@cam.ac.uk>
>> ---
>>  fs/debugfs/file.c |   17 ++++-------------
>>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/debugfs/file.c b/fs/debugfs/file.c
>> index 89d394d..568304d 100644
>> --- a/fs/debugfs/file.c
>> +++ b/fs/debugfs/file.c
>> @@ -429,25 +429,16 @@ static ssize_t write_file_bool(struct file *file, const char __user *user_buf,
>>  {
>>  	char buf[32];
>>  	int buf_size;
>> +	bool bv;
>>  	u32 *val = file->private_data;
>>  
>>  	buf_size = min(count, (sizeof(buf)-1));
>>  	if (copy_from_user(buf, user_buf, buf_size))
>>  		return -EFAULT;
>>  
>> -	switch (buf[0]) {
>> -	case 'y':
>> -	case 'Y':
>> -	case '1':
>> -		*val = 1;
>> -		break;
>> -	case 'n':
>> -	case 'N':
>> -	case '0':
>> -		*val = 0;
>> -		break;
>> -	}
>> -	
>> +	if (strtobool(buf, &bv) == 0)
>> +		*val = bv;
>> +
>>  	return count;
>>  }
>>  
> 
>