Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] Make sscanf() stricter

Demi Marie Obenour
2023-06-12T21:25:46Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1818 bytes --]

On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 12:00:44AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 04:25:01PM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 02:59:38PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > > > + bool _placeholder;
> > > > + return simple_strntoull(cp, INT_MAX, endp, base, &_placeholder);
> > >
> > > This can be done without introducing dummy variables:
> > >
> > > void f(bool *b)
> > > {
> > > }
> > >
> > > f((bool[1]){});
> >
> > This is more consise, but (at least to me) significantly less readable.
> >
> > > > > lib/vsprintf.c:3727:26: error: unknown conversion type character ‘!’ in format [-Werror=format=]
> > > > So NAK.
> > >
> > > Yeah, ! should go after format specifier like it does for %p.
> >
> > I hadn't considered that. Is the typical approach in Linux to use e.g.
> > %d%[!] if one wants a literal '!'?
>
> It might be that the cleanest way we have is to create %p-like extensions to
> sscanf(). %p takes alnum as parameter and that is usually works since it makes
> a little sense to attach alnum suffix to the pointer.
>
> (I don't like to have %dX, where X is alnum as we expanding our hack to
> something which people don't expect to be altered even in the kernelm, you may
> refer to the discussion about %de for printing errors)

Personally I’m not too worried about compatibility with userspace
sscanf(), except to the extent that -Werror=format can keep working.
Userspace sscanf() is almost useless: it has undefined behavior on
integer overflow and swallows spaces that should usually be rejected.
I typically either use strto*l() or (as I am currently doing for Xen’s
toolstack) just write my own parsing functions from scratch.
--
Sincerely,
Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)
Invisible Things Lab

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]