| Message ID | 20170815150812.32237-1-jtulak@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 8/15/17 10:08 AM, Jan Tulak wrote: > Save exactly what the user gave us for every option. This way, we will > never lose the information if we need it to print back an issue. > (Just add the infrastructure now, used in the next patches.) > > Signed-off-by: Jan Tulak <jtulak@redhat.com> Sorry for not getting to the V1 review, catching up from a week off. > --- > CHANGE: > * test for NULL before strdup in get_conf_raw > * Translation and indentation for fprints > * add set_conf_raw_safe > --- > mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 88 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c > index 7bb6408f..adfbd376 100644 > --- a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c > +++ b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c > @@ -107,6 +107,11 @@ unsigned int sectorsize; > * sets what is used with simple specifying the subopt (-d file). > * A special SUBOPT_NEEDS_VAL can be used to require a user-given > * value in any case. > + * > + * raw_input INTERNAL > + * Filled raw string from the user, so we never lose that information e.g. > + * to print it back in case of an issue. > + * > */ > struct opt_params { > const char name; > @@ -122,6 +127,7 @@ struct opt_params { > long long minval; > long long maxval; > long long defaultval; > + char *raw_input; > } subopt_params[MAX_SUBOPTS]; > }; > > @@ -730,6 +736,88 @@ struct opt_params mopts = { > #define WHACK_SIZE (128 * 1024) > > /* > + * Return 0 on success, -ENOMEM if it could not allocate enough memory for > + * the string to be saved. > + */ > +static int > +set_conf_raw(struct opt_params *opt, const int subopt, const char *value) > +{ > + if (subopt < 0 || subopt >= MAX_SUBOPTS) { > + fprintf(stderr, > + _("This is a bug: set_conf_raw called with invalid " > + "opt/subopt: %c/%d\n"), Usually best to just out-dent these long strings to column zero: _("This is a bug: set_conf_raw called with invalid opt/subopt: %c/%d\n"), and that makes them super grep-able. Other places in xfsprogs do that. > + opt->name, subopt); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + if (value == NULL) { > + if (opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input != NULL) > + free(opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input); > + opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input = NULL; > + } else { > + opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input = strdup(value); > + if (opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input == NULL) > + return -ENOMEM; > + } > + return 0; > +} > + > +/* > + * Same as set_conf_raw(), except if any error occurs, return NULL. > + */ Hm, that's not what this void function does. > +static void > +set_conf_raw_safe(struct opt_params *opt, const int subopt, const char *value) > +{ > + if (set_conf_raw(opt, subopt, value) != 0) { > + exit(1); > + } So on -ENOMEM error, we get a silent exit()? Also, not sure about the point of the wrapper. Nothing in this series calls set_conf_raw() directly - do later patches use it? If not, just lose the wrapper, I'd say, and roll up the behavior in set_conf_raw. > +} > + > +/* > + * Return 0 on success, -ENOMEM if it could not allocate enough memory for > + * the string to be saved into the out pointer. ..., or -EINVAL if ___? I guess this is the downside of excessive commenting ;) > + */ > +static int > +get_conf_raw(const struct opt_params *opt, const int subopt, char **out) > +{ > + if (subopt < 0 || subopt >= MAX_SUBOPTS) { > + fprintf(stderr, > + _("This is a bug: get_conf_raw called with invalid " > + "opt/subopt: %c/%d\n"), Again I'd outdent this error string. > + opt->name, subopt); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + > + if (opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input == NULL) { > + *out = NULL; > + return 0; > + } > + > + *out = strdup(opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input); > + if (*out == NULL) > + return -ENOMEM; > + return 0; > + > +} > + > +/* > + * Same as get_conf_raw(), except it returns the string through return. > + * If any error occurs, return NULL. > + */ > +static char * > +get_conf_raw_safe(const struct opt_params *opt, const int subopt) > +{ > + char *str; > + > + str = NULL; > + > + if (get_conf_raw(opt, subopt, &str) == -ENOMEM) { > + fprintf(stderr, "Out of memory!"); Seems like using strerror() would be better than a hand-rolled, un- translatable string? > + return NULL; > + } Again, I don't see that any subsequent patches ever call get_conf_raw(); is there any reason to even have this wrapper now? > + return str; > +} > + > +/* > * Convert lsu to lsunit for 512 bytes blocks and check validity of the values. > */ > static void > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 1:07 AM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> wrote: > On 8/15/17 10:08 AM, Jan Tulak wrote: >> Save exactly what the user gave us for every option. This way, we will >> never lose the information if we need it to print back an issue. >> (Just add the infrastructure now, used in the next patches.) >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Tulak <jtulak@redhat.com> > > Sorry for not getting to the V1 review, catching up from a week off. I hope you enjoyed your holiday. :-) > >> --- >> CHANGE: >> * test for NULL before strdup in get_conf_raw >> * Translation and indentation for fprints >> * add set_conf_raw_safe >> --- >> mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 88 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c >> index 7bb6408f..adfbd376 100644 >> --- a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c >> +++ b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c >> @@ -107,6 +107,11 @@ unsigned int sectorsize; >> * sets what is used with simple specifying the subopt (-d file). >> * A special SUBOPT_NEEDS_VAL can be used to require a user-given >> * value in any case. >> + * >> + * raw_input INTERNAL >> + * Filled raw string from the user, so we never lose that information e.g. >> + * to print it back in case of an issue. >> + * >> */ >> struct opt_params { >> const char name; >> @@ -122,6 +127,7 @@ struct opt_params { >> long long minval; >> long long maxval; >> long long defaultval; >> + char *raw_input; >> } subopt_params[MAX_SUBOPTS]; >> }; >> >> @@ -730,6 +736,88 @@ struct opt_params mopts = { >> #define WHACK_SIZE (128 * 1024) >> >> /* >> + * Return 0 on success, -ENOMEM if it could not allocate enough memory for >> + * the string to be saved. >> + */ >> +static int >> +set_conf_raw(struct opt_params *opt, const int subopt, const char *value) >> +{ >> + if (subopt < 0 || subopt >= MAX_SUBOPTS) { >> + fprintf(stderr, >> + _("This is a bug: set_conf_raw called with invalid " >> + "opt/subopt: %c/%d\n"), > > Usually best to just out-dent these long strings to column zero: > > _("This is a bug: set_conf_raw called with invalid opt/subopt: %c/%d\n"), > > and that makes them super grep-able. Other places in xfsprogs do that. True, I will change it. > >> + opt->name, subopt); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + if (value == NULL) { >> + if (opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input != NULL) >> + free(opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input); >> + opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input = NULL; >> + } else { >> + opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input = strdup(value); >> + if (opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input == NULL) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + } >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> +/* >> + * Same as set_conf_raw(), except if any error occurs, return NULL. >> + */ > > Hm, that's not what this void function does. copypasta of comment :( > >> +static void >> +set_conf_raw_safe(struct opt_params *opt, const int subopt, const char *value) >> +{ >> + if (set_conf_raw(opt, subopt, value) != 0) { >> + exit(1); >> + } > > So on -ENOMEM error, we get a silent exit()? > > Also, not sure about the point of the wrapper. Nothing in this series > calls set_conf_raw() directly - do later patches use it? If not, > just lose the wrapper, I'd say, and roll up the behavior in set_conf_raw. > >> +} >> + >> +/* >> + * Return 0 on success, -ENOMEM if it could not allocate enough memory for >> + * the string to be saved into the out pointer. > > ..., or -EINVAL if ___? I guess this is the downside of excessive commenting ;) > >> + */ >> +static int >> +get_conf_raw(const struct opt_params *opt, const int subopt, char **out) >> +{ >> + if (subopt < 0 || subopt >= MAX_SUBOPTS) { >> + fprintf(stderr, >> + _("This is a bug: get_conf_raw called with invalid " >> + "opt/subopt: %c/%d\n"), > > Again I'd outdent this error string. > >> + opt->name, subopt); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> + if (opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input == NULL) { >> + *out = NULL; >> + return 0; >> + } >> + >> + *out = strdup(opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input); >> + if (*out == NULL) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + return 0; >> + >> +} >> + >> +/* >> + * Same as get_conf_raw(), except it returns the string through return. >> + * If any error occurs, return NULL. >> + */ >> +static char * >> +get_conf_raw_safe(const struct opt_params *opt, const int subopt) >> +{ >> + char *str; >> + >> + str = NULL; >> + >> + if (get_conf_raw(opt, subopt, &str) == -ENOMEM) { >> + fprintf(stderr, "Out of memory!"); > > Seems like using strerror() would be better than a hand-rolled, un- > translatable string? Every day there is something new. :-) > >> + return NULL; >> + } > > Again, I don't see that any subsequent patches ever call get_conf_raw(); > is there any reason to even have this wrapper now? Luis had a pretty strong opinion about having them there when he will need them in his own patches later on and I saw no reason why not to add them right now when the functions are created. After all, they will be useful later on also for me, when I want to limit the amount of asserts and be more return-oriented. It's just not in this patchset. Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 8/16/17 4:11 AM, Jan Tulak wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 1:07 AM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> wrote: >> On 8/15/17 10:08 AM, Jan Tulak wrote: >>> Save exactly what the user gave us for every option. This way, we will >>> never lose the information if we need it to print back an issue. >>> (Just add the infrastructure now, used in the next patches.) >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Tulak <jtulak@redhat.com> >> >> Sorry for not getting to the V1 review, catching up from a week off. > > I hope you enjoyed your holiday. :-) ... >>> +static char * >>> +get_conf_raw_safe(const struct opt_params *opt, const int subopt) >>> +{ >>> + char *str; >>> + >>> + str = NULL; >>> + >>> + if (get_conf_raw(opt, subopt, &str) == -ENOMEM) { >>> + fprintf(stderr, "Out of memory!"); >> >> Seems like using strerror() would be better than a hand-rolled, un- >> translatable string? > > Every day there is something new. :-) Yeah, sorry. But in general, strings need to be translatable; (that was pointed out before) and strerror() would do that for your for free. >> >>> + return NULL; >>> + } >> >> Again, I don't see that any subsequent patches ever call get_conf_raw(); >> is there any reason to even have this wrapper now? > > Luis had a pretty strong opinion about having them there when he will > need them in his own patches later on and I saw no reason why not to > add them right now when the functions are created. After all, they > will be useful later on also for me, when I want to limit the amount > of asserts and be more return-oriented. It's just not in this > patchset. Hm, ok. Let me reread that, thread - I'm just looking at this patchset as sent. In general, I'm not clear on what your "_safe" and "_unsafe" variants are about but maybe it was discussed in the prior thread I skipped. Thanks, -Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> wrote: > On 8/16/17 4:11 AM, Jan Tulak wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 1:07 AM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> wrote: >>> On 8/15/17 10:08 AM, Jan Tulak wrote: >>>> Save exactly what the user gave us for every option. This way, we will >>>> never lose the information if we need it to print back an issue. >>>> (Just add the infrastructure now, used in the next patches.) >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Tulak <jtulak@redhat.com> >>> >>> >>>> + return NULL; >>>> + } >>> >>> Again, I don't see that any subsequent patches ever call get_conf_raw(); >>> is there any reason to even have this wrapper now? >> >> Luis had a pretty strong opinion about having them there when he will >> need them in his own patches later on and I saw no reason why not to >> add them right now when the functions are created. After all, they >> will be useful later on also for me, when I want to limit the amount >> of asserts and be more return-oriented. It's just not in this >> patchset. > > Hm, ok. Let me reread that, thread - I'm just looking at this patchset > as sent. > > In general, I'm not clear on what your "_safe" and "_unsafe" variants > are about but maybe it was discussed in the prior thread I skipped. > It is about being able to decide what should happen when an error occurs and how good practice it is to just call exit() instead of propagating the error upwards in the stack. Right now, we can abort without a big issue (at least technically), but, for example, with a config file parsing, we will want to print the line of the config file which is invalid. These two threads should give you the details: https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-xfs/msg08635.html https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-xfs/msg08636.html In any case, I will wait with sending further versions of these patches until you had the time to look at it. Cheers, Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c index 7bb6408f..adfbd376 100644 --- a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c +++ b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c @@ -107,6 +107,11 @@ unsigned int sectorsize; * sets what is used with simple specifying the subopt (-d file). * A special SUBOPT_NEEDS_VAL can be used to require a user-given * value in any case. + * + * raw_input INTERNAL + * Filled raw string from the user, so we never lose that information e.g. + * to print it back in case of an issue. + * */ struct opt_params { const char name; @@ -122,6 +127,7 @@ struct opt_params { long long minval; long long maxval; long long defaultval; + char *raw_input; } subopt_params[MAX_SUBOPTS]; }; @@ -730,6 +736,88 @@ struct opt_params mopts = { #define WHACK_SIZE (128 * 1024) /* + * Return 0 on success, -ENOMEM if it could not allocate enough memory for + * the string to be saved. + */ +static int +set_conf_raw(struct opt_params *opt, const int subopt, const char *value) +{ + if (subopt < 0 || subopt >= MAX_SUBOPTS) { + fprintf(stderr, + _("This is a bug: set_conf_raw called with invalid " + "opt/subopt: %c/%d\n"), + opt->name, subopt); + return -EINVAL; + } + if (value == NULL) { + if (opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input != NULL) + free(opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input); + opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input = NULL; + } else { + opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input = strdup(value); + if (opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input == NULL) + return -ENOMEM; + } + return 0; +} + +/* + * Same as set_conf_raw(), except if any error occurs, return NULL. + */ +static void +set_conf_raw_safe(struct opt_params *opt, const int subopt, const char *value) +{ + if (set_conf_raw(opt, subopt, value) != 0) { + exit(1); + } +} + +/* + * Return 0 on success, -ENOMEM if it could not allocate enough memory for + * the string to be saved into the out pointer. + */ +static int +get_conf_raw(const struct opt_params *opt, const int subopt, char **out) +{ + if (subopt < 0 || subopt >= MAX_SUBOPTS) { + fprintf(stderr, + _("This is a bug: get_conf_raw called with invalid " + "opt/subopt: %c/%d\n"), + opt->name, subopt); + return -EINVAL; + } + + if (opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input == NULL) { + *out = NULL; + return 0; + } + + *out = strdup(opt->subopt_params[subopt].raw_input); + if (*out == NULL) + return -ENOMEM; + return 0; + +} + +/* + * Same as get_conf_raw(), except it returns the string through return. + * If any error occurs, return NULL. + */ +static char * +get_conf_raw_safe(const struct opt_params *opt, const int subopt) +{ + char *str; + + str = NULL; + + if (get_conf_raw(opt, subopt, &str) == -ENOMEM) { + fprintf(stderr, "Out of memory!"); + return NULL; + } + return str; +} + +/* * Convert lsu to lsunit for 512 bytes blocks and check validity of the values. */ static void
Save exactly what the user gave us for every option. This way, we will never lose the information if we need it to print back an issue. (Just add the infrastructure now, used in the next patches.) Signed-off-by: Jan Tulak <jtulak@redhat.com> --- CHANGE: * test for NULL before strdup in get_conf_raw * Translation and indentation for fprints * add set_conf_raw_safe --- mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 88 insertions(+)