"Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 7:36 PM Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> "Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > For your convenience, I already wrote a safe wrapper of kstrtobool for
>> > an out-of-tree driver. You're welcome to copy-paste this:
>> >
>> > fn kstrtobool(kstr: &CStr) -> Result<bool> {
>> > let mut res = false;
>> > to_result(unsafe {
>> > kernel::bindings::kstrtobool(kstr.as_char_ptr(), &mut res) })?;
>> > Ok(res)
>> > }
>>
>> Thanks, I did one as well today, accepting `&str` instead. The examples
>> highlight why it is not great:
>
> Yeah, well, I think we should still use it for consistency.
>
>> /// Convert common user inputs into boolean values using the kernel's `kstrtobool` function.
>> ///
>> /// This routine returns `Ok(bool)` if the first character is one of 'YyTt1NnFf0', or
>> /// [oO][NnFf] for "on" and "off". Otherwise it will return `Err(EINVAL)`.
>> ///
>> /// # Examples
>> ///
>> /// ```
>> /// # use kernel::str::kstrtobool;
>> ///
>> /// // Lowercase
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("true"), Ok(true));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("tr"), Ok(true));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("t"), Ok(true));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("twrong"), Ok(true)); // <-- 🤷
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("false"), Ok(false));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("f"), Ok(false));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("yes"), Ok(true));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("no"), Ok(false));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("on"), Ok(true));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("off"), Ok(false));
>> ///
>> /// // Camel case
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("True"), Ok(true));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("False"), Ok(false));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("Yes"), Ok(true));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("No"), Ok(false));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("On"), Ok(true));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("Off"), Ok(false));
>> ///
>> /// // All caps
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("TRUE"), Ok(true));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("FALSE"), Ok(false));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("YES"), Ok(true));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("NO"), Ok(false));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("ON"), Ok(true));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("OFF"), Ok(false));
>> ///
>> /// // Numeric
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("1"), Ok(true));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("0"), Ok(false));
>> ///
>> /// // Invalid input
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("invalid"), Err(EINVAL));
>> /// assert_eq!(kstrtobool("2"), Err(EINVAL));
>> /// ```
>> pub fn kstrtobool(input: &str) -> Result<bool> {
>> let mut result: bool = false;
>> let c_str = CString::try_from_fmt(fmt!("{input}"))?;
>>
>> // SAFETY: `c_str` points to a valid null-terminated C string, and `result` is a valid
>> // pointer to a bool that we own.
>> let ret = unsafe { bindings::kstrtobool(c_str.as_char_ptr(), &mut result as *mut bool) };
>>
>> kernel::error::to_result(ret).map(|_| result)
>> }
>>
>> Not sure if we should take `CStr` or `str`, what do you think?
>
> Using CStr makes sense, since it avoids having the caller perform a
> useless utf-8 check.
If we re-implement the entire function in rust, we can do the processing
on a `&str`. That way, we can skip the allocation to enforce null
termination. At least for this use case. I would rather do a utf8 check
than allocate and copy.
Best regards,
Andreas Hindborg
