This patch replaces sprintf() with sysfs_emit() and sysfs_emit_at() safer alternative
with no functional changes.

Signed-off-by: Tomas Borquez <tomasborquez13@gmail.com>
---
V2:
- Fixed recipient list to include all reviewers (no code changes)
V3:
- Improved patch description and fixed indentation

 drivers/iio/light/isl29018.c | 12 ++++++------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/isl29018.c b/drivers/iio/light/isl29018.c
index 1b4c184230..b6ab726d1d 100644
--- a/drivers/iio/light/isl29018.c
+++ b/drivers/iio/light/isl29018.c
@@ -273,9 +273,9 @@ static ssize_t in_illuminance_scale_available_show
 
 	mutex_lock(&chip->lock);
 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(isl29018_scales[chip->int_time]); ++i)
-		len += sprintf(buf + len, "%d.%06d ",
-			       isl29018_scales[chip->int_time][i].scale,
-			       isl29018_scales[chip->int_time][i].uscale);
+		len += sysfs_emit_at(buf, len, "%d.%06d ",
+				     isl29018_scales[chip->int_time][i].scale,
+				     isl29018_scales[chip->int_time][i].uscale);
 	mutex_unlock(&chip->lock);
 
 	buf[len - 1] = '\n';
@@ -293,8 +293,8 @@ static ssize_t in_illuminance_integration_time_available_show
 	int len = 0;
 
 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(isl29018_int_utimes[chip->type]); ++i)
-		len += sprintf(buf + len, "0.%06d ",
-			       isl29018_int_utimes[chip->type][i]);
+		len += sysfs_emit_at(buf, len, "0.%06d ",
+				     isl29018_int_utimes[chip->type][i]);
 
 	buf[len - 1] = '\n';
 
@@ -330,7 +330,7 @@ static ssize_t proximity_on_chip_ambient_infrared_suppression_show
 	 * Return the "proximity scheme" i.e. if the chip does on chip
 	 * infrared suppression (1 means perform on chip suppression)
 	 */
-	return sprintf(buf, "%d\n", chip->prox_scheme);
+	return sysfs_emit(buf, "%d\n", chip->prox_scheme);
 }
 
 static ssize_t proximity_on_chip_ambient_infrared_suppression_store
-- 
2.43.0

On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 05:32:40PM -0300, Tomas Borquez wrote:
> This patch replaces sprintf() with sysfs_emit() and sysfs_emit_at() safer alternative

This is a bit too long. Usually in the commit message the ~75 is a good
threshold.

> with no functional changes.

Code wise LGTM,
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>

P.S. Do NOT resend if not asked so. Jonathan may amend this whilst applying.
Also note, this most likely misses the v6.19-rc1, so we have plenty of time,
no rush with it.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 11:09:07PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> This is a bit too long. Usually in the commit message the ~75 is a good
> threshold.
> 
...
> P.S. Do NOT resend if not asked so. Jonathan may amend this whilst applying.
> Also note, this most likely misses the v6.19-rc1, so we have plenty of time,
> no rush with it.
Ah I see, my bad, its my first patch so I'm still adjusting to the workflow.
Thanks for the feedback, will keep everything in mind!

Tomas

On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 06:46:18PM -0300, Tomas Borquez wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 11:09:07PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > This is a bit too long. Usually in the commit message the ~75 is a good
> > threshold.

...

> > P.S. Do NOT resend if not asked so. Jonathan may amend this whilst applying.
> > Also note, this most likely misses the v6.19-rc1, so we have plenty of time,
> > no rush with it.

> Ah I see, my bad, its my first patch so I'm still adjusting to the workflow.
> Thanks for the feedback, will keep everything in mind!

NP and welcome aboard!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko