Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of nvidia.com designates
 216.228.117.160 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com;
 client-ip=216.228.117.160; helo=mail.nvidia.com; pr=C
Message-ID: <f61fb7c1-64ab-c3c3-bd95-92a962f07226@nvidia.com>
Date:   Fri, 2 Jun 2023 11:52:42 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.2
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/12] selftests/mm: fix a char* assignment in
 mlock2-tests.c
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>, David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
CC:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20230602013358.900637-1-jhubbard@nvidia.com>
 <20230602013358.900637-5-jhubbard@nvidia.com>
 <18e69073-1007-07d8-bf0d-5f400ecab8ea@redhat.com> <ZHoJxAWtwBo33l6B@x1n>
From:   John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
In-Reply-To: <ZHoJxAWtwBo33l6B@x1n>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Jun 2023 18:56:47.7835
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 7d882acd-2675-4cf0-7f45-08db639b1e16
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a;Ip=[216.228.117.160];Helo=[mail.nvidia.com]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: CO1NAM11FT046.eop-nam11.prod.protection.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DS0PR12MB8319
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,
        DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FORGED_SPF_HELO,
        NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_PASS,
        SPF_NONE,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no
        autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
        lindbergh.monkeyblade.net
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 6/2/23 08:24, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 12:04:57PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 02.06.23 03:33, John Hubbard wrote:
>>> The stop variable is a char*, so use "\0" when assigning to it, rather
>>> than attempting to assign a character type. This was generating a
>>> warning when compiling with clang.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
>>> ---
>>>    tools/testing/selftests/mm/mlock2-tests.c | 2 +-
>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/mlock2-tests.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/mlock2-tests.c
>>> index 11b2301f3aa3..8ee95077dc25 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/mlock2-tests.c
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/mlock2-tests.c
>>> @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static int get_vm_area(unsigned long addr, struct vm_boundaries *area)
>>>    			printf("cannot parse /proc/self/maps\n");
>>>    			goto out;
>>>    		}
>>> -		stop = '\0';
>>> +		stop = "\0";
>>>    		sscanf(line, "%lx", &start);
>>>    		sscanf(end_addr, "%lx", &end);
>>
>>
>> I'm probably missing something, but what is the stop variable supposed to do
>> here? It's completely unused, no?
>>
>> if (!strchr(end_addr, ' ')) {
>> 	printf("cannot parse /proc/self/maps\n");
>> 	goto out;
>> }

Yes it is! I certainly had tunnel vision on that one. I've changed the
patch to simply delete that line, for v2, thanks.

> 
> I guess it wanted to do "*stop = '\0'" but it just didn't matter a lot
> since the sscanf() just worked..
> 

Maybe, yes. Hard to tell the original intent at this point...it might
have been used in an early draft version of the loop that didn't get
posted, perhaps.
thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard
NVIDIA