Re: [PATCH v1 10/10] efivars: use generic UUID library

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Thu, 2016-02-18 at 15:07 +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Feb, at 02:17:28PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Instead of opencoding let's use generic UUID library functions
> > here.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Âfs/efivarfs/inode.c | 40 +++-------------------------------------
> > Â1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/efivarfs/inode.c b/fs/efivarfs/inode.c
> > index 3381b9d..b579e3a 100644
> > --- a/fs/efivarfs/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/efivarfs/inode.c
> > @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
> > Â#include <linux/fs.h>
> > Â#include <linux/ctype.h>
> > Â#include <linux/slab.h>
> > +#include <linux/uuid.h>
> > Â
> > Â#include "internal.h"
> > Â
> > @@ -44,11 +45,7 @@ struct inode *efivarfs_get_inode(struct
> > super_block *sb,
> > Â */
> > Âbool efivarfs_valid_name(const char *str, int len)
> > Â{
> > -	static const char dashes[EFI_VARIABLE_GUID_LEN] = {
> > -		[8] = 1, [13] = 1, [18] = 1, [23] = 1
> > -	};
> > Â	const char *s = str + len - EFI_VARIABLE_GUID_LEN;
> > -	int i;
> > Â
> > Â	/*
> > Â	Â* We need a GUID, plus at least one letter for the
> > variable name,
> > @@ -66,37 +63,7 @@ bool efivarfs_valid_name(const char *str, int
> > len)
> > Â	Â*
> > Â	Â*	12345678-1234-1234-1234-123456789abc
> > Â	Â*/
> > -	for (i = 0; i < EFI_VARIABLE_GUID_LEN; i++) {
> > -		if (dashes[i]) {
> > -			if (*s++ != '-')
> > -				return false;
> > -		} else {
> > -			if (!isxdigit(*s++))
> > -				return false;
> > -		}
> > -	}
> > -
> > -	return true;
> > -}
> > -
> > -static void efivarfs_hex_to_guid(const char *str, efi_guid_t
> > *guid)
> > -{
> > -	guid->b[0] = hex_to_bin(str[6]) << 4 | hex_to_bin(str[7]);
> > -	guid->b[1] = hex_to_bin(str[4]) << 4 | hex_to_bin(str[5]);
> > -	guid->b[2] = hex_to_bin(str[2]) << 4 | hex_to_bin(str[3]);
> > -	guid->b[3] = hex_to_bin(str[0]) << 4 | hex_to_bin(str[1]);
> > -	guid->b[4] = hex_to_bin(str[11]) << 4 |
> > hex_to_bin(str[12]);
> > -	guid->b[5] = hex_to_bin(str[9]) << 4 |
> > hex_to_bin(str[10]);
> > -	guid->b[6] = hex_to_bin(str[16]) << 4 |
> > hex_to_bin(str[17]);
> > -	guid->b[7] = hex_to_bin(str[14]) << 4 |
> > hex_to_bin(str[15]);
> > -	guid->b[8] = hex_to_bin(str[19]) << 4 |
> > hex_to_bin(str[20]);
> > -	guid->b[9] = hex_to_bin(str[21]) << 4 |
> > hex_to_bin(str[22]);
> > -	guid->b[10] = hex_to_bin(str[24]) << 4 |
> > hex_to_bin(str[25]);
> > -	guid->b[11] = hex_to_bin(str[26]) << 4 |
> > hex_to_bin(str[27]);
> > -	guid->b[12] = hex_to_bin(str[28]) << 4 |
> > hex_to_bin(str[29]);
> > -	guid->b[13] = hex_to_bin(str[30]) << 4 |
> > hex_to_bin(str[31]);
> > -	guid->b[14] = hex_to_bin(str[32]) << 4 |
> > hex_to_bin(str[33]);
> > -	guid->b[15] = hex_to_bin(str[34]) << 4 |
> > hex_to_bin(str[35]);
> > +	return uuid_is_valid(s);
> > Â}
> 
> I think you've confused yourself here. You've inverted the return
> value meaning for efivarfs_valid_name().
> 
> Normally I would expect this change to be correct but uuid_is_valid()
> returns 0 for success, -EINVAL for failure. Either the function is
> misnamed or the return value semantics are wrong.

Oops, thanks for noticing this. Right the return value should be
aligned.

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Intel Finland Oy