2021-10-28 07:24:36

by Yajun Deng

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH net-next] batman-adv: Fix the wrong definition

There are three variables that are required at most,
no need to define four variables.

Fixes: 0fa4c30d710d ("batman-adv: Make sysfs support optional")
Signed-off-by: Yajun Deng <[email protected]>
---
net/batman-adv/main.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/net/batman-adv/main.c b/net/batman-adv/main.c
index 3ddd66e4c29e..758035b3796d 100644
--- a/net/batman-adv/main.c
+++ b/net/batman-adv/main.c
@@ -656,7 +656,7 @@ int batadv_throw_uevent(struct batadv_priv *bat_priv, enum batadv_uev_type type,
{
int ret = -ENOMEM;
struct kobject *bat_kobj;
- char *uevent_env[4] = { NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL };
+ char *uevent_env[3] = {};

bat_kobj = &bat_priv->soft_iface->dev.kobj;

--
2.32.0


2021-10-28 07:36:47

by Sven Eckelmann

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] batman-adv: Fix the wrong definition

On Thursday, 28 October 2021 09:23:06 CEST Yajun Deng wrote:
> There are three variables that are required at most,
> no need to define four variables.

NAck. This is absolutely wrong - the last one is the "STOP" info. With your
patch, it would sometimes (action != BATADV_UEV_DEL) not have the stop NULL.
See also the second parameter in this for loop on line
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/lib/kobject_uevent.c?id=1fc596a56b334f4d593a2b49e5ff55af6aaa0816#n548

We can discuss that this can be written in a better way. See
https://patchwork.open-mesh.org/project/b.a.t.m.a.n./patch/1403982781.9064.33.camel@joe-AO725/
(also the remark from Antonio).

>
> Fixes: 0fa4c30d710d ("batman-adv: Make sysfs support optional")

Even this Fixes would be wrong. The code is there since commit
c6bda689c2c9 ("batman-adv: add wrapper function to throw uevent in
userspace").

But even then, this would not fix anything but just be a cleanup.

> Signed-off-by: Yajun Deng <[email protected]>
> ---
> net/batman-adv/main.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/batman-adv/main.c b/net/batman-adv/main.c
> index 3ddd66e4c29e..758035b3796d 100644
> --- a/net/batman-adv/main.c
> +++ b/net/batman-adv/main.c
> @@ -656,7 +656,7 @@ int batadv_throw_uevent(struct batadv_priv *bat_priv, enum batadv_uev_type type,
> {
> int ret = -ENOMEM;
> struct kobject *bat_kobj;
> - char *uevent_env[4] = { NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL };
> + char *uevent_env[3] = {};
>
> bat_kobj = &bat_priv->soft_iface->dev.kobj;
>
>


Attachments:
signature.asc (849.00 B)
This is a digitally signed message part.

2021-10-28 07:51:37

by Yajun Deng

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] batman-adv: Fix the wrong definition

October 28, 2021 3:35 PM, "Antonio Quartulli" <[email protected]> 写到:

> Hi,
>
> On 28/10/2021 09:23, Yajun Deng wrote:
>
>> There are three variables that are required at most,
>> no need to define four variables.
>>
>> Fixes: 0fa4c30d710d ("batman-adv: Make sysfs support optional")
>> Signed-off-by: Yajun Deng <[email protected]>
>
> NAK.
>
> kobject_uevent_env() does not know how many items are stored in the
> array and thus requires it to be NULL terminated.
>
> Please check the following for reference:
>
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.15-rc6/source/lib/kobject_uevent.c#L548
>
Oh, I didn't notice there.
> OTOH I guess we could still use '{}' for the initialization.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Antonio Quartulli

2021-10-28 08:05:13

by Antonio Quartulli

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] batman-adv: Fix the wrong definition

Hi,

On 28/10/2021 09:23, Yajun Deng wrote:
> There are three variables that are required at most,
> no need to define four variables.
>
> Fixes: 0fa4c30d710d ("batman-adv: Make sysfs support optional")
> Signed-off-by: Yajun Deng <[email protected]>

NAK.

kobject_uevent_env() does not know how many items are stored in the
array and thus requires it to be NULL terminated.

Please check the following for reference:

https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.15-rc6/source/lib/kobject_uevent.c#L548

OTOH I guess we could still use '{}' for the initialization.

Regards,

--
Antonio Quartulli