From: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
To: barebox@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] console: don't count newlines twice in bytes written
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:16:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <387a016b-c15f-8d26-0ec8-346d0a0b564b@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d371c18e-3834-c559-2bde-1fcfd9b155dc@pengutronix.de>
Hello,
On 8/22/19 9:04 AM, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
>
>
> On 8/5/19 11:11 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 12:21:41PM +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
>>> Both the PBL and simple console only return number of input bytes, not
>>> number of bytes actually written out. These differ, because each LF is
>>> converted to CRLF pairs.
>>>
>>> The behavior of not counting actual written out characters is more sensible,
>>> because otherwise callers interested in finding out if all bytes have been
>>> written (e.g. to avoid incomplete writes with ratp) would need to keep count
>>> of all line feeds in the string.
>>> Therefore change the normal console to behave like its less featureful
>>> brethren.
>>
>> According to "man puts" puts() returns a non negative number on success.
>> I can't find a place where it's claimed that we have to return the
>> number of characters.
>
> console_puts in common/console_simple.c and pbl/console.c already return the
> number of characters. Same for all the console_device puts members in the
> drivers.
>
>> I also can't find a place where the return value
>> of any puts like function in barebox is ever evaluated. Given that it
>> might make more sense to just return zero in the absense of an error.
>
> I too think there isn't, but it would be less surprising if common/console.c
> would behave like other puts's in barebox.
Sorry, I mixed it up. Ye, it's arguable whether they should return number
of input bytes written or zero. But no other puts in barebox counts new lines
twice, so I think the patch has its merit, even if a follow up patch in future
has puts functions return 0 instead.
>
>>
>> Sascha
>>
>
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-22 8:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-31 10:21 Ahmad Fatoum
2019-07-31 10:21 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] ratp: return 0 bytes written from puts if busy Ahmad Fatoum
2019-08-05 8:59 ` Sascha Hauer
2019-08-22 6:57 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2019-07-31 10:21 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] console: fix out-of-bounds read in dputc(/dev/*, ...) Ahmad Fatoum
2019-08-22 7:06 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2019-08-23 7:07 ` Sascha Hauer
2019-08-23 9:28 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2019-08-05 9:11 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] console: don't count newlines twice in bytes written Sascha Hauer
2019-08-22 7:04 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2019-08-22 8:16 ` Ahmad Fatoum [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=387a016b-c15f-8d26-0ec8-346d0a0b564b@pengutronix.de \
--to=a.fatoum@pengutronix.de \
--cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox