2022-01-21 18:28:27

by Lucas De Marchi

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

There are a few implementations of yesno() in the tree. Consolidate them
in include/linux/string_helpers.h. Quite a few users of open coded
yesno() could later be converted to the new function:

$ git grep '?\s*"yes"\s*' | wc -l
286
$ git grep '?\s*"no"\s*' | wc -l
20

The inlined function should keep the const strings local to each
compilation unit, the same way it's now, thus not changing the current
behavior.

Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <[email protected]>
---
.../amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_debugfs.c | 6 +-----
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_utils.h | 5 -----
.../net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cxgb4_debugfs.c | 11 -----------
include/linux/string_helpers.h | 2 ++
security/tomoyo/audit.c | 2 +-
security/tomoyo/common.c | 18 ++++--------------
security/tomoyo/common.h | 1 -
7 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_debugfs.c
index 9d43ecb1f692..b59760f91bf6 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_debugfs.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_debugfs.c
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
*
*/

+#include <linux/string_helpers.h>
#include <linux/uaccess.h>

#include "dc.h"
@@ -49,11 +50,6 @@ struct dmub_debugfs_trace_entry {
uint32_t param1;
};

-static inline const char *yesno(bool v)
-{
- return v ? "yes" : "no";
-}
-
/* parse_write_buffer_into_params - Helper function to parse debugfs write buffer into an array
*
* Function takes in attributes passed to debugfs write entry
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_utils.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_utils.h
index 7a5925072466..2a8781cc648b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_utils.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_utils.h
@@ -414,11 +414,6 @@ wait_remaining_ms_from_jiffies(unsigned long timestamp_jiffies, int to_wait_ms)
#define MBps(x) KBps(1000 * (x))
#define GBps(x) ((u64)1000 * MBps((x)))

-static inline const char *yesno(bool v)
-{
- return v ? "yes" : "no";
-}
-
static inline const char *onoff(bool v)
{
return v ? "on" : "off";
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cxgb4_debugfs.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cxgb4_debugfs.c
index 7d49fd4edc9e..61a04d7abc1f 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cxgb4_debugfs.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cxgb4_debugfs.c
@@ -2015,17 +2015,6 @@ static const struct file_operations rss_debugfs_fops = {
/* RSS Configuration.
*/

-/* Small utility function to return the strings "yes" or "no" if the supplied
- * argument is non-zero.
- */
-static const char *yesno(int x)
-{
- static const char *yes = "yes";
- static const char *no = "no";
-
- return x ? yes : no;
-}
-
static int rss_config_show(struct seq_file *seq, void *v)
{
struct adapter *adapter = seq->private;
diff --git a/include/linux/string_helpers.h b/include/linux/string_helpers.h
index 4ba39e1403b2..e980dec05d31 100644
--- a/include/linux/string_helpers.h
+++ b/include/linux/string_helpers.h
@@ -102,4 +102,6 @@ char *kstrdup_quotable_file(struct file *file, gfp_t gfp);

void kfree_strarray(char **array, size_t n);

+static inline const char *yesno(bool v) { return v ? "yes" : "no"; }
+
#endif
diff --git a/security/tomoyo/audit.c b/security/tomoyo/audit.c
index d79bf07e16be..1458e27361e8 100644
--- a/security/tomoyo/audit.c
+++ b/security/tomoyo/audit.c
@@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ static char *tomoyo_print_header(struct tomoyo_request_info *r)
"#%04u/%02u/%02u %02u:%02u:%02u# profile=%u mode=%s granted=%s (global-pid=%u) task={ pid=%u ppid=%u uid=%u gid=%u euid=%u egid=%u suid=%u sgid=%u fsuid=%u fsgid=%u }",
stamp.year, stamp.month, stamp.day, stamp.hour,
stamp.min, stamp.sec, r->profile, tomoyo_mode[r->mode],
- tomoyo_yesno(r->granted), gpid, tomoyo_sys_getpid(),
+ yesno(r->granted), gpid, tomoyo_sys_getpid(),
tomoyo_sys_getppid(),
from_kuid(&init_user_ns, current_uid()),
from_kgid(&init_user_ns, current_gid()),
diff --git a/security/tomoyo/common.c b/security/tomoyo/common.c
index 5c64927bf2b3..304ed0f426dd 100644
--- a/security/tomoyo/common.c
+++ b/security/tomoyo/common.c
@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
#include <linux/uaccess.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/security.h>
+#include <linux/string_helpers.h>
#include "common.h"

/* String table for operation mode. */
@@ -174,16 +175,6 @@ static bool tomoyo_manage_by_non_root;

/* Utility functions. */

-/**
- * tomoyo_yesno - Return "yes" or "no".
- *
- * @value: Bool value.
- */
-const char *tomoyo_yesno(const unsigned int value)
-{
- return value ? "yes" : "no";
-}
-
/**
* tomoyo_addprintf - strncat()-like-snprintf().
*
@@ -730,8 +721,8 @@ static void tomoyo_print_config(struct tomoyo_io_buffer *head, const u8 config)
{
tomoyo_io_printf(head, "={ mode=%s grant_log=%s reject_log=%s }\n",
tomoyo_mode[config & 3],
- tomoyo_yesno(config & TOMOYO_CONFIG_WANT_GRANT_LOG),
- tomoyo_yesno(config & TOMOYO_CONFIG_WANT_REJECT_LOG));
+ yesno(config & TOMOYO_CONFIG_WANT_GRANT_LOG),
+ yesno(config & TOMOYO_CONFIG_WANT_REJECT_LOG));
}

/**
@@ -1354,8 +1345,7 @@ static bool tomoyo_print_condition(struct tomoyo_io_buffer *head,
case 3:
if (cond->grant_log != TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_AUTO)
tomoyo_io_printf(head, " grant_log=%s",
- tomoyo_yesno(cond->grant_log ==
- TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES));
+ yesno(cond->grant_log == TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES));
tomoyo_set_lf(head);
return true;
}
diff --git a/security/tomoyo/common.h b/security/tomoyo/common.h
index 85246b9df7ca..ca285f362705 100644
--- a/security/tomoyo/common.h
+++ b/security/tomoyo/common.h
@@ -959,7 +959,6 @@ char *tomoyo_read_token(struct tomoyo_acl_param *param);
char *tomoyo_realpath_from_path(const struct path *path);
char *tomoyo_realpath_nofollow(const char *pathname);
const char *tomoyo_get_exe(void);
-const char *tomoyo_yesno(const unsigned int value);
const struct tomoyo_path_info *tomoyo_compare_name_union
(const struct tomoyo_path_info *name, const struct tomoyo_name_union *ptr);
const struct tomoyo_path_info *tomoyo_get_domainname
--
2.34.1


2022-01-21 19:04:39

by Sakari Ailus

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

Hi Lucas,

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 11:24:48PM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> @@ -1354,8 +1345,7 @@ static bool tomoyo_print_condition(struct tomoyo_io_buffer *head,
> case 3:
> if (cond->grant_log != TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_AUTO)
> tomoyo_io_printf(head, " grant_log=%s",
> - tomoyo_yesno(cond->grant_log ==
> - TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES));
> + yesno(cond->grant_log == TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES));

This would be better split on two lines.

Then,

Reviewed-by: Sakari Ailus <[email protected]>

--
Sakari Ailus

2022-01-21 19:22:20

by Steven Rostedt

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:59 +0200
Sakari Ailus <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 11:24:48PM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> > @@ -1354,8 +1345,7 @@ static bool tomoyo_print_condition(struct tomoyo_io_buffer *head,
> > case 3:
> > if (cond->grant_log != TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_AUTO)
> > tomoyo_io_printf(head, " grant_log=%s",
> > - tomoyo_yesno(cond->grant_log ==
> > - TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES));
> > + yesno(cond->grant_log == TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES));
>
> This would be better split on two lines.

Really? Yuck!

I thought the "max line size" guideline was going to grow to a 100, but I
still see it as 80. But anyway...

cond->grant_log ==
TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES

is not readable at all. Not compared to

cond->grant_log == TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES

I say keep it one line!

Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <[email protected]>

-- Steve

>
> Then,
>
> Reviewed-by: Sakari Ailus <[email protected]>

2022-01-21 19:22:29

by Steven Rostedt

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:15:08 +0200
Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> wrote:

> > +static inline const char *yesno(bool v) { return v ? "yes" : "no"; }
>
>
>
> Perhaps keep it on 4 lines? Yes, yes/no is short, but if we add others
> (enable/disable) it will not be possible to keep on one line. And hence
> style will be broken among similar functions.

Agreed. Functions should always be of the normal format:

type func(params)
{
body;
}

Unless it is a stub function.

type func(params) { return 0; }

-- Steve

2022-01-21 19:50:03

by David Laight

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

> > > > +static inline const char *yesno(bool v) { return v ? "yes" : "no"; }
>
> return "yes\0no" + v * 4;
>
> :-)

except '"no\0\0yes" + v * 4' works a bit better.

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

2022-01-21 19:51:04

by David Laight

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

> > > +static inline const char *yesno(bool v) { return v ? "yes" : "no"; }

return "yes\0no" + v * 4;

:-)

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

2022-01-21 19:59:56

by Andy Shevchenko

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 04:38:26PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > > > > +static inline const char *yesno(bool v) { return v ? "yes" : "no"; }
> >
> > return "yes\0no" + v * 4;
> >
> > :-)
>
> except '"no\0\0yes" + v * 4' works a bit better.

Is it a C code obfuscation contest?

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko


2022-01-21 20:00:01

by Andy Shevchenko

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 10:06:35AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:59 +0200
> Sakari Ailus <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 11:24:48PM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> > > @@ -1354,8 +1345,7 @@ static bool tomoyo_print_condition(struct tomoyo_io_buffer *head,
> > > case 3:
> > > if (cond->grant_log != TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_AUTO)
> > > tomoyo_io_printf(head, " grant_log=%s",
> > > - tomoyo_yesno(cond->grant_log ==
> > > - TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES));
> > > + yesno(cond->grant_log == TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES));
> >
> > This would be better split on two lines.
>
> Really? Yuck!
>
> I thought the "max line size" guideline was going to grow to a 100, but I
> still see it as 80. But anyway...
>
> cond->grant_log ==
> TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES
>
> is not readable at all. Not compared to
>
> cond->grant_log == TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES
>
> I say keep it one line!
>
> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <[email protected]>

I believe Sakari strongly follows the 80 rule, which means...

> > Reviewed-by: Sakari Ailus <[email protected]>

...chose either of these tags and be happy with :-)

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko


2022-01-21 20:03:15

by Lucas De Marchi

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 10:06:35AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:59 +0200
>Sakari Ailus <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 11:24:48PM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>> > @@ -1354,8 +1345,7 @@ static bool tomoyo_print_condition(struct tomoyo_io_buffer *head,
>> > case 3:
>> > if (cond->grant_log != TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_AUTO)
>> > tomoyo_io_printf(head, " grant_log=%s",
>> > - tomoyo_yesno(cond->grant_log ==
>> > - TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES));
>> > + yesno(cond->grant_log == TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES));
>>
>> This would be better split on two lines.
>
>Really? Yuck!
>
>I thought the "max line size" guideline was going to grow to a 100, but I
>still see it as 80. But anyway...

Checking that: docs still say 80, but checkpatch was changed to warn
only on 100. Commit bdc48fa11e46 ("checkpatch/coding-style: deprecate
80-column warning") is clear why the discrepancy.

Lucas De Marchi

>
> cond->grant_log ==
> TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES
>
>is not readable at all. Not compared to
>
> cond->grant_log == TOMOYO_GRANTLOG_YES
>
>I say keep it one line!
>
>Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <[email protected]>
>
>-- Steve
>
>>
>> Then,
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Sakari Ailus <[email protected]>
>

2022-01-21 20:04:19

by Steven Rostedt

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 21:25:08 +0200
Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> wrote:

> > I say keep it one line!
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <[email protected]>
>
> I believe Sakari strongly follows the 80 rule, which means...

Checkpatch says "100" I think we need to simply update the docs (the
documentation always lags the code ;-)

bdc48fa11e46f

-- Steve

2022-01-21 20:05:22

by Steven Rostedt

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 21:22:57 +0200
Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 04:38:26PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > > > > > +static inline const char *yesno(bool v) { return v ? "yes" : "no"; }
> > >
> > > return "yes\0no" + v * 4;
> > >
> > > :-)
> >
> > except '"no\0\0yes" + v * 4' works a bit better.
>
> Is it a C code obfuscation contest?
>

return '/'/'/';

-- Steve

2022-01-21 20:05:31

by Andy Shevchenko

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 04:00:17PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 21:25:08 +0200
> Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I say keep it one line!
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <[email protected]>
> >
> > I believe Sakari strongly follows the 80 rule, which means...
>
> Checkpatch says "100" I think we need to simply update the docs (the
> documentation always lags the code ;-)

The idea of checkpatch change is for old code to avoid tons of patches
to satisfy 80 rule in (mostly) staging code. Some maintainers started /
have been using relaxed approach.

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko


2022-01-21 20:06:54

by David Laight

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

> > except '"no\0\0yes" + v * 4' works a bit better.
>
> Is it a C code obfuscation contest?

That would be:
return &(v * 3)["no\0yes"];

:-)

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

2022-01-22 00:28:20

by Joe Perches

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno() implementation

On Wed, 2022-01-19 at 16:00 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 21:25:08 +0200
> Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I say keep it one line!
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <[email protected]>
> >
> > I believe Sakari strongly follows the 80 rule, which means...
>
> Checkpatch says "100" I think we need to simply update the docs (the
> documentation always lags the code ;-)

checkpatch doesn't say anything normally, it's a stupid script.
It just mindlessly bleats a message when a line exceeds 100 chars...

Just fyi: I think it's nicer on a single line too.