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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 A5C41ECE588 for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 13:20:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78422218DE for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 13:20:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="JSDWOhRT" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731940AbfJONUu (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Oct 2019 09:20:50 -0400 Received: from mail-yw1-f65.google.com ([209.85.161.65]:35232 "EHLO mail-yw1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728386AbfJONUt (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Oct 2019 09:20:49 -0400 Received: by mail-yw1-f65.google.com with SMTP id r134so7324640ywg.2; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 06:20:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=D3fT6mJQ0MI3tnwGYI9a5cNsV8GCpshvfBo2XlqzibE=; b=JSDWOhRTQR7mcD2V+Sv4e2n37vg6VoRXbzilaYZz3Siqcw+f2p8I8FG1NqtLQpXm+6 P9YGUWyf/gBw8Yze048gCOiEqBw5KI9q6h1GBINFYm5+bn38Nsa32FEJB7yysMd1S0nK VJCT0MhOylRBChpMqW1d/9J/fHwVuzwDKHg/zdjHOeiySQE0yc9sdwgYyKMKl3G9wTxb Uf3zdyIgL9gUe8uXeybJkZrTD2G0ddJdcoUhPwCGV0pfezLRgixaxztVeKzkkiOxyXe2 ASqP8dggBcyk6J0eJYVAcXxQyy62v7UsydVFnI+cEwALKPOnPg3kgBH8uOSblKtNpRU9 HPig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=D3fT6mJQ0MI3tnwGYI9a5cNsV8GCpshvfBo2XlqzibE=; b=d989PQjvwx+3h6mMZ0PtYrG2jHZtno/XDtajLSy4giJee6WqNd4RZi/CZ4teX/sGNG 2B4HfLOAChOboSudlLnPzkQl30MrqKtbuH1alaGXq1eiAzoyLgw8gqyP3aXxQ+kurnEZ KYl0ssvNlLiosADlB1CNbRL61ZFbW2+hFSukRPwnPr5GgJw4tjkb3OM20RHZTbA4acsv CZqRLEMyvzFAGrfjs4cVkVzgVQ7qXCbg+pCqO02ciEj9FR8RGHxgm+nYnUqkQHQQl7M0 vF+5IzCXxG9PAHa0zs3Z1RBdQBzVm00KSQ+xTIdSvIloRDkAUSVbk1++28hA9wRCO2Om k9cw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWDZSlFWuA5C9CLAMJjMZ9WKecT/SYD5q4jjcrZXxSqtgem820j sYqoollwGaEVGTwpkFAwFA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzPaJpFM2drv34anPBYkT5+u0Wp61PBbm/yyybELyaJC0imWzJwOd60Ii1krEpXotxdd/+eNg== X-Received: by 2002:a81:6c4c:: with SMTP id h73mr15215118ywc.262.1571145647145; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 06:20:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 960 ([12.156.111.130]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l2sm5163256ywd.16.2019.10.15.06.20.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 15 Oct 2019 06:20:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4eaef0a107796895fc59989d1481676f794fcac5.camel@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: huawei-wmi: make validation stricter in huawei_wmi_battery_set() From: ayman.bagabas@gmail.com To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Darren Hart , Andy Shevchenko , Takashi Iwai , Mattias Jacobsson <2pi@mok.nu>, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 09:20:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20191015124623.GF21344@kadam> References: <20191015083837.GA29104@mwanda> <20191015124623.GF21344@kadam> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.32.4 (3.32.4-1.fc30) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2019-10-15 at 15:46 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 08:21:59AM -0400, Ayman Bagabas wrote: > > Hi Dan > > > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019, 4:39 AM Dan Carpenter < > > dan.carpenter@oracle.com> > > wrote: > > > > > I don't think it makes sense for "end" to be negative or for even > > > for it > > > to be less than "start". That also means that "start" can't be > > > more > > > than 100 which is good. > > > > > > > While this makes sense, you run into issues where you cannot set > > "start" > > before "end" and vice versa. > > > > Take this scenario, you have start=70 and end=90, now you want to > > set these > > to start=40 and end=60, you would have to set "start" first before > > you can > > change the value of "end" otherwise you will run into EINVAL. Now > > imagine > > you wanna go the opposite direction, you would have to set "end" > > before you > > can change "start". > > I think having a little wiggle room is fine for such scenarios. > > > > I haven't tested this code... What you're describing sounds really > very weird to me, but I will accept that you know more about your > use cases than I do. > > My other concern is that right now you can set start > 100 or end < > 0. We should check for these cases. > > regards, > dan carpenter >