Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752768AbaANAW6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jan 2014 19:22:58 -0500 Received: from mail-ea0-f169.google.com ([209.85.215.169]:39041 "EHLO mail-ea0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752429AbaANAWu (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jan 2014 19:22:50 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20140113233006.GP10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <804857E1F29AAC47BF68C404FC60A1846542A6B2@ORSMSX105.amr.corp.intel.com> <20140113233006.GP10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 07:22:49 +0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: U4znj5OJaTouNS5rfOcotlXspVI Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug in sscanf()? From: Linus Torvalds To: Al Viro Cc: "Allan, Bruce W" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jan Beulich , Alexey Dobriyan Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 6:30 AM, Al Viro wrote: > > Comments? Do we have actual users of this? Because I'd almost be inclined to say "we just don't support field widths on sscanf() and will warn" unless there are users. We've done that before. The kernel has various limited functions. See the whole snprint() issue with %n, which we decided that supporting the full semantics was actually a big mistake and we actively *removed* code that had been misguidedly added just because people thought we should do everything a standard user library does.. Limiting our problem space is a *good* thing, not a bad thing. If it's possible, of course, and we don't have nasty users. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/