Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 9 Jan 2023 23:59:13 +0900 | From | Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] tracing/eprobe: no need to check for negative ret value for snprintf |
| |
On Mon, 9 Jan 2023 12:06:25 +0800 Quanfa Fu <quanfafu@gmail.com> wrote:
> No need to check for negative return value from snprintf() as the > code does not return negative values. >
Thanks for simplifying, this looks good to me.
Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Quanfa Fu <quanfafu@gmail.com> > > ----- > V2 -> V3: continue to use snprintf > V1 -> V2: memory allc uses kzalloc and replace snprintf with memcpy > --- > kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c | 12 ++++-------- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c > index 352b65e2b910..594ac1d086aa 100644 > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c > @@ -923,17 +923,13 @@ static int trace_eprobe_parse_filter(struct trace_eprobe *ep, int argc, const ch > > p = ep->filter_str; > for (i = 0; i < argc; i++) { > - ret = snprintf(p, len, "%s ", argv[i]); > - if (ret < 0) > - goto error; > - if (ret > len) { > - ret = -E2BIG; > - goto error; > - } > + if (i) > + ret = snprintf(p, len, " %s", argv[i]); > + else > + ret = snprintf(p, len, "%s", argv[i]); > p += ret; > len -= ret; > } > - p[-1] = '\0'; > > /* > * Ensure the filter string can be parsed correctly. Note, this > -- > 2.31.1 >
-- Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
| |