[patch -resend] 9p: fix min_t() casting in p9pdu_vwritef()

I don't think we're actually likely to hit this limit but if we do
then the comparison should be done as size_t.  The original code
is equivalent to:
        len = strlen(sptr) % USHRT_MAX;

Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <redacted>
---
I was told this patch "has already made it upstream via the v9fs pull."
but it must have been dropped accidentally.  Originally sent on Sat,
Jan 15, 2011.

diff --git a/net/9p/protocol.c b/net/9p/protocol.c
index 9ee48cb..3d33ecf 100644
--- a/net/9p/protocol.c
+++ b/net/9p/protocol.c

@@ -368,7 +368,7 @@ p9pdu_vwritef(struct p9_fcall *pdu, int proto_version, const char *fmt,
 				const char *sptr = va_arg(ap, const char *);
 				uint16_t len = 0;
 				if (sptr)
-					len = min_t(uint16_t, strlen(sptr),
+					len = min_t(size_t, strlen(sptr),
 								USHRT_MAX);
 
 				errcode = p9pdu_writef(pdu, proto_version,

Am 27.06.2012 11:01, schrieb Dan Carpenter:

this will result in
	uint16_t = size_t
i would expect compilers to complains since uint16 < size_t (most times). In this special case
it seems more easy  write it. also ushort seems ambitious since  uint16_t  need not to be ushort.
so my idea would look like this:

	len=strlen
	if (len>65535) len=65535;
	p9pdu_writef(...,(unint16_t)len);

just my 2 cents,
 wh	
	

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:19:26PM +0200, walter harms wrote:

Am 27.06.2012 11:01, schrieb Dan Carpenter:

quoted

I don't think we're actually likely to hit this limit but if we do
then the comparison should be done as size_t.  The original code
is equivalent to:
        len = strlen(sptr) % USHRT_MAX;

Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <redacted>
---
I was told this patch "has already made it upstream via the v9fs pull."
but it must have been dropped accidentally.  Originally sent on Sat,
Jan 15, 2011.

diff --git a/net/9p/protocol.c b/net/9p/protocol.c
index 9ee48cb..3d33ecf 100644
--- a/net/9p/protocol.c
+++ b/net/9p/protocol.c

@@ -368,7 +368,7 @@ p9pdu_vwritef(struct p9_fcall *pdu, int proto_version, const char *fmt,
 				const char *sptr = va_arg(ap, const char *);
 				uint16_t len = 0;
 				if (sptr)
-					len = min_t(uint16_t, strlen(sptr),
+					len = min_t(size_t, strlen(sptr),
 								USHRT_MAX);
 
 				errcode = p9pdu_writef(pdu, proto_version,

this will result in
	uint16_t = size_t
i would expect compilers to complains since uint16 < size_t
(most times). In this special case it seems more easy  write it.
also ushort seems ambitious since  uint16_t  need not to be
ushort.  so my idea would look like this:

	len=strlen
	if (len>65535) len=65535;
	p9pdu_writef(...,(unint16_t)len);

No.  I'm sorry, what you're saying is complete nonsense.  The whole
point of min_t() is that you can cast to both sides to what you want
before you do the compare.

Obviously I wouldn't submit a patch that introduces a compile
warning.  :/

regards,
dan carpenter

From: Dan Carpenter <redacted>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 12:01:41 +0300

I don't think we're actually likely to hit this limit but if we do
then the comparison should be done as size_t.  The original code
is equivalent to:
        len = strlen(sptr) % USHRT_MAX;

Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <redacted>

Applied, thanks Dan.