From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52347)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1TDxlX-0007rt-Iy
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 09:23:09 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1TDxlR-0003UG-OY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 09:23:03 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40673)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1TDxlR-0003UC-Gr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 09:22:57 -0400
Message-ID: <5058759C.50207@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:22:36 +0200
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20120917152149.GB6879@in.ibm.com>
	<20120917152343.GD6879@in.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20120917152343.GD6879@in.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7 2/5] sockets: Change inet_parse() to
 accept address specification without port
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, Anand Avati <aavati@redhat.com>, Vijay Bellur <vbellur@redhat.com>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>, Amar Tumballi <amarts@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>

Am 17.09.2012 17:23, schrieb Bharata B Rao:
> sockets: Change inet_parse() to accept address specification without port
> 
> From: Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> inet_parse() expects address:port. Change it to work without explicit port
> specification. In addition, don't depend solely on the return value of

Things like "in addition" in a commit message are almost always a sign
that the patch should be split in two.

> sscanf but also consider the value obtained for %n directive used in sscanf.
> This ensures that the scanning of malformed inet address isn't flagged as
> success.

Can you give an example string that would be falsely accepted? To me the
old checks look fine (even though the new ones are a little bit easier
to read, so even if they don't fix anything, they might be worth doing).

Anyway, it does look correct.

Kevin