'endptr' is appropriate internally in strtol(3) because it's a pointer
to 'end', and 'end' itself is a pointer to one-after-the-last character
of the numeric string. In other words,
endptr == &end
However, naming the pointer whose address we pass to strtol(3)'s
'endptr' feels wrong, and causes me trouble while parsing the code; I
need to double check the number of dereferences, because something feels
wrong in my head.
Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
- Set errno = 0 before the call. Otherwise, it may contain anything.
- ERANGE is not the only possible errno value of these functions. They
can also set it to EINVAL.
- Any errno value after these calls is bad; just compare against 0.
- Don't check for the return value; just errno. This function is
guaranteed to not modify errno on success (POSIX).
- Check endptr == str, which may or may not set EINVAL.
Suggested-by: Iker Pedrosa <ipedrosa@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
The multiplication was already invoking UB. The test was flawed.
Use __builtin_mul_overflow() instead.
Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
strtol(3) doesn't specify a return value if (value == endptr).
It is always an error, if (value==endptr).
Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
