Move extraction of the mode information parameters outside the loop to
find the gop, and eliminate some redundant variables.
Signed-off-by: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200320020028.1936003-4-nivedita@alum.mit.edu
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Fix the following sparse warning:
drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/arm-stub.c:68:6: warning:
symbol 'install_memreserve_table' was not declared. Should it be static?
Reported-by: Hulk Robot <hulkci@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Zou Wei <zou_wei@huawei.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1587643713-28169-1-git-send-email-zou_wei@huawei.com
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
We have wrappers around EFI calls so that x86 can define special
versions for mixed mode, while all other architectures can use the
same simple definition that just issues the call directly.
In preparation for the arrival of yet another architecture that doesn't
need anything special here (RISC-V), let's move the default definition
into a shared header.
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Loading an initrd passed via the kernel command line is deprecated: it
is limited to files that reside in the same volume as the one the kernel
itself was loaded from, and we have more flexible ways to achieve the
same. So make it configurable so new architectures can decide not to
enable it.
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Most of the arm-stub code is written in an architecture independent manner.
As a result, RISC-V can reuse most of the arm-stub code.
Rename the arm-stub.c to efi-stub.c so that ARM, ARM64 and RISC-V can use it.
This patch doesn't introduce any functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
Reviewed-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200415195422.19866-2-atish.patra@wdc.com
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
When remapping a mapping where a portion of a VMA is remapped
into another portion of the VMA it can cause the VMA to become
split. During the copy_vma operation the VMA can actually
be remerged if it's an anonymous VMA whose pages have not yet
been faulted. This isn't normally a problem because at the end
of the remap the original portion is unmapped causing it to
become split again.
However, MREMAP_DONTUNMAP leaves that original portion in place which
means that the VMA which was split and then remerged is not actually
split at the end of the mremap. This patch fixes a bug where
we don't detect that the VMAs got remerged and we end up
putting back VM_ACCOUNT on the next mapping which is completely
unreleated. When that next mapping is unmapped it results in
incorrectly unaccounting for the memory which was never accounted,
and eventually we will underflow on the memory comittment.
There is also another issue which is similar, we're currently
accouting for the number of pages in the new_vma but that's wrong.
We need to account for the length of the remap operation as that's
all that is being added. If there was a mapping already at that
location its comittment would have been adjusted as part of
the munmap at the start of the mremap.
A really simple repro can be seen in:
https://gist.github.com/bgaff/e101ce99da7d9a8c60acc641d07f312c
Fixes: e346b38130 ("mm/mremap: add MREMAP_DONTUNMAP to mremap()")
Reported-by: syzbot <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>
Signed-off-by: Brian Geffon <bgeffon@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
clk where we want to keep it on for earlycon.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=6Qda
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag 'clk-fixes-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/clk/linux
Pull clk fixes from Stephen Boyd:
"Two build fixes for a couple clk drivers and a fix for the Unisoc
serial clk where we want to keep it on for earlycon"
* tag 'clk-fixes-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/clk/linux:
clk: sprd: don't gate uart console clock
clk: mmp2: fix link error without mmp2
clk: asm9260: fix __clk_hw_register_fixed_rate_with_accuracy typo
objtool:
- Ignore the double UD2 which is emitted in BUG() when CONFIG_UBSAN_TRAP
is enabled.
- Support clang non-section symbols in objtool ORC dump
- Fix switch table detection in .text.unlikely
- Make the BP scratch register warning more robust.
x86:
- Increase microcode maximum patch size for AMD to cope with new CPUs
which have a larger patch size.
- Fix a crash in the resource control filesystem when the removal of the
default resource group is attempted.
- Preserve Code and Data Prioritization enabled state accross CPU
hotplug.
- Update split lock cpu matching to use the new X86_MATCH macros.
- Change the split lock enumeration as Intel finaly decided that the
IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES bits are not architectural contrary to what
the SDM claims. !@#%$^!
- Add Tremont CPU models to the split lock detection cpu match.
- Add a missing static attribute to make sparse happy.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=raUm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag 'x86-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip
Pull x86 and objtool fixes from Thomas Gleixner:
"A set of fixes for x86 and objtool:
objtool:
- Ignore the double UD2 which is emitted in BUG() when
CONFIG_UBSAN_TRAP is enabled.
- Support clang non-section symbols in objtool ORC dump
- Fix switch table detection in .text.unlikely
- Make the BP scratch register warning more robust.
x86:
- Increase microcode maximum patch size for AMD to cope with new CPUs
which have a larger patch size.
- Fix a crash in the resource control filesystem when the removal of
the default resource group is attempted.
- Preserve Code and Data Prioritization enabled state accross CPU
hotplug.
- Update split lock cpu matching to use the new X86_MATCH macros.
- Change the split lock enumeration as Intel finaly decided that the
IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES bits are not architectural contrary to what
the SDM claims. !@#%$^!
- Add Tremont CPU models to the split lock detection cpu match.
- Add a missing static attribute to make sparse happy"
* tag 'x86-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip:
x86/split_lock: Add Tremont family CPU models
x86/split_lock: Bits in IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES are not architectural
x86/resctrl: Preserve CDP enable over CPU hotplug
x86/resctrl: Fix invalid attempt at removing the default resource group
x86/split_lock: Update to use X86_MATCH_INTEL_FAM6_MODEL()
x86/umip: Make umip_insns static
x86/microcode/AMD: Increase microcode PATCH_MAX_SIZE
objtool: Make BP scratch register warning more robust
objtool: Fix switch table detection in .text.unlikely
objtool: Support Clang non-section symbols in ORC generation
objtool: Support Clang non-section symbols in ORC dump
objtool: Fix CONFIG_UBSAN_TRAP unreachable warnings
instead of clockid numbers. The usability nuisance of numbers was noticed
by Michael when polishing the man page.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=slEk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag 'timers-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip
Pull time namespace fix from Thomas Gleixner:
"An update for the proc interface of time namespaces: Use symbolic
names instead of clockid numbers. The usability nuisance of numbers
was noticed by Michael when polishing the man page"
* tag 'timers-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip:
proc, time/namespace: Show clock symbolic names in /proc/pid/timens_offsets
- Fix the header line of perf stat output for '--metric-only --per-socket'
- Fix the python build with clang
- The usual tools UAPI header synchronization
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=Dd1H
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag 'perf-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip
Pull perf tooling fixes and updates from Thomas Gleixner:
- Fix the header line of perf stat output for '--metric-only --per-socket'
- Fix the python build with clang
- The usual tools UAPI header synchronization
* tag 'perf-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip:
tools headers: Synchronize linux/bits.h with the kernel sources
tools headers: Adopt verbatim copy of compiletime_assert() from kernel sources
tools headers: Update x86's syscall_64.tbl with the kernel sources
tools headers UAPI: Sync drm/i915_drm.h with the kernel sources
tools headers UAPI: Update tools's copy of drm.h headers
tools headers kvm: Sync linux/kvm.h with the kernel sources
tools headers UAPI: Sync linux/fscrypt.h with the kernel sources
tools include UAPI: Sync linux/vhost.h with the kernel sources
tools arch x86: Sync asm/cpufeatures.h with the kernel sources
tools headers UAPI: Sync linux/mman.h with the kernel
tools headers UAPI: Sync sched.h with the kernel
tools headers: Update linux/vdso.h and grab a copy of vdso/const.h
perf stat: Fix no metric header if --per-socket and --metric-only set
perf python: Check if clang supports -fno-semantic-interposition
tools arch x86: Sync the msr-index.h copy with the kernel sources
- Remove setup_irq() and remove_irq(). All users have been converted so
remove them before new users surface.
- A set of bugfixes for various interrupt chip drivers
- Add a few missing static attributes to address sparse warnings.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQJHBAABCgAxFiEEQp8+kY+LLUocC4bMphj1TA10mKEFAl6cUuMTHHRnbHhAbGlu
dXRyb25peC5kZQAKCRCmGPVMDXSYoYi7EACOFPrwdOlKqDdgU1FGReEzhJeNSSyH
yUp1m2nNckz8Y2B+ihnLsfvcktZSXYRuDTZ/u/rmaKqq2wH5Q/h4DNQxEfoMNUep
IVBlvAFcGsvpdSbrlc+nx6sEo0K2b22AQVHdyPECiQYFZJikstAtEfzEv+ZaUr2S
Lcds295BIQylbugQpcVZL73j6iUKQ+P5YU0Wlkd/Vhlnxe9UdMd/N1P3GoRaRlOa
QxYDJCnZJjWkN+cEVRCAZVTat6pd3zaMHvEabI39Lzx4U+nu4vh62TILwk+wdpuA
DzgA+ENFXzv2zLlnF8gB0wKWw3J99No9gfRpuK/vWBQ68UeZsPlM5PKEr93oD4cC
To9D70r71UM+LS+Km8ciFlqeT4N+hIMb/x8rpIf5Tcfn5spXjNEhR4U6/d/D2ZYy
cQiu82th9kSOMGBhlrfkJ0gAT20UfAktDHU1M4JhwI5Y/DLusb6mfg0CRMj8ucOV
0xrKkgHxhX162oRTKzy5OTMWQRGTvIQZg1QE3xxtrT2qCq4ypu0EHQbh3GdfcIVQ
8n+s/Dde6etmbSwDDdEuRi///zM+hvaiXi5KOV28LYgRDbU78cAX8uRgX9sq2pg+
WxK9ulprkW6Ci1yTts9Q6FY+ZBekg7NBKXXDCJdPwXxTLRrdci68pPZip12AaWxP
2HYxWhE8LvmKAw==
=jaX5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag 'irq-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip
Pull irq fixes from Thomas Gleixner:
"A set of fixes/updates for the interrupt subsystem:
- Remove setup_irq() and remove_irq(). All users have been converted
so remove them before new users surface.
- A set of bugfixes for various interrupt chip drivers
- Add a few missing static attributes to address sparse warnings"
* tag 'irq-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip:
irqchip/irq-bcm7038-l1: Make bcm7038_l1_of_init() static
irqchip/irq-mvebu-icu: Make legacy_bindings static
irqchip/meson-gpio: Fix HARDIRQ-safe -> HARDIRQ-unsafe lock order
irqchip/sifive-plic: Fix maximum priority threshold value
irqchip/ti-sci-inta: Fix processing of masked irqs
irqchip/mbigen: Free msi_desc on device teardown
irqchip/gic-v4.1: Update effective affinity of virtual SGIs
irqchip/gic-v4.1: Add support for VPENDBASER's Dirty+Valid signaling
genirq: Remove setup_irq() and remove_irq()
- Work around an uninitializaed variable warning where GCC can't figure it
out.
- Allow 'isolcpus=' to skip unknown subparameters so that older kernels
work with the commandline of a newer kernel. Improve the error output
while at it.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=AKgh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag 'sched-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip
Pull scheduler fixes from Thomas Gleixner:
"Two fixes for the scheduler:
- Work around an uninitialized variable warning where GCC can't
figure it out.
- Allow 'isolcpus=' to skip unknown subparameters so that older
kernels work with the commandline of a newer kernel. Improve the
error output while at it"
* tag 'sched-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip:
sched/vtime: Work around an unitialized variable warning
sched/isolation: Allow "isolcpus=" to skip unknown sub-parameters
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=QjbA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag 'core-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip
Pull RCU fix from Thomas Gleixner:
"A single bugfix for RCU to prevent taking a lock in NMI context"
* tag 'core-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip:
rcu: Don't acquire lock in NMI handler in rcu_nmi_enter_common()
generic/388 in data=journal mode, removing some BUG_ON's, and cleaning
up some compiler warnings.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAABCAAdFiEEK2m5VNv+CHkogTfJ8vlZVpUNgaMFAl6cj80ACgkQ8vlZVpUN
gaOx5Qf/XY7JUEp1nGgcdZyUd8uho3dKkG4TuUU5PvGsiDb4ozGsyU51q2LnOHWF
uzDJaE03z5uc1i8C9mQRLzjzaOC8B8kQZuKfkcQ/xI4CS3cG4qRdeNdHUz5QyfhK
5THDzr2z1tuWDuhlp+jCPjCz1fJowHxva/7ktf1OrMVEErYlZXT8CPLIRBCeuuCX
/07/8tJ5jJoqpI3kmy1jFotMEhIBE0vixf+sfcp2RWjdb0/1LH2JPWCytX+hhSFR
SadWDvTIvVy/rMahLHgc/VyPP47QwLWzBmLm9CdyxmDeUaM4Qwx8Zfog4+8g78wl
IvSuHRDdTYnOO35Qbzjl2wanhzCiQQ==
=qzEh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag 'ext4_for_linus_stable' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4
Pull ext4 fixes from Ted Ts'o:
"Miscellaneous bug fixes and cleanups for ext4, including a fix for
generic/388 in data=journal mode, removing some BUG_ON's, and cleaning
up some compiler warnings"
* tag 'ext4_for_linus_stable' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4:
ext4: convert BUG_ON's to WARN_ON's in mballoc.c
ext4: increase wait time needed before reuse of deleted inode numbers
ext4: remove set but not used variable 'es' in ext4_jbd2.c
ext4: remove set but not used variable 'es'
ext4: do not zeroout extents beyond i_disksize
ext4: fix return-value types in several function comments
ext4: use non-movable memory for superblock readahead
ext4: use matching invalidatepage in ext4_writepage
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=G+Rl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag '5.7-rc-smb3-fixes' of git://git.samba.org/sfrench/cifs-2.6
Pull cifs fixes from Steve French:
"Three small smb3 fixes: two debug related (helping network tracing for
SMB2 mounts, and the other removing an unintended debug line on
signing failures), and one fixing a performance problem with 64K
pages"
* tag '5.7-rc-smb3-fixes' of git://git.samba.org/sfrench/cifs-2.6:
smb3: remove overly noisy debug line in signing errors
cifs: improve read performance for page size 64KB & cache=strict & vers=2.1+
cifs: dump the session id and keys also for SMB2 sessions
Hi Linus,
Please, pull the following patches that replace zero-length arrays with
flexible-array members.
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
sizeof(flexible-array-member) triggers a warning because flexible array
members have incomplete type[1]. There are some instances of code in
which the sizeof operator is being incorrectly/erroneously applied to
zero-length arrays and the result is zero. Such instances may be hiding
some bugs. So, this work (flexible-array member convertions) will also
help to get completely rid of those sorts of issues.
Notice that all of these patches have been baking in linux-next for
quite a while now and, 238 more of these patches have already been
merged into 5.7-rc1.
There are a couple hundred more of these issues waiting to be addressed
in the whole codebase.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Thanks
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=GsIm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag 'flexible-array-member-5.7-rc2' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gustavoars/linux
Pull flexible-array member conversion from Gustavo Silva:
"The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array
member[1][2], introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof
operator may not be applied. As a quirk of the original
implementation of zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
sizeof(flexible-array-member) triggers a warning because flexible
array members have incomplete type[1]. There are some instances of
code in which the sizeof operator is being incorrectly/erroneously
applied to zero-length arrays and the result is zero. Such instances
may be hiding some bugs. So, this work (flexible-array member
convertions) will also help to get completely rid of those sorts of
issues.
Notice that all of these patches have been baking in linux-next for
quite a while now and, 238 more of these patches have already been
merged into 5.7-rc1.
There are a couple hundred more of these issues waiting to be
addressed in the whole codebase"
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
* tag 'flexible-array-member-5.7-rc2' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gustavoars/linux: (28 commits)
xattr.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
uapi: linux: fiemap.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
uapi: linux: dlm_device.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
tpm_eventlog.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
ti_wilink_st.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
swap.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
skbuff.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
sched: topology.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
rslib.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
rio.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
posix_acl.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
platform_data: wilco-ec.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
memcontrol.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
list_lru.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
lib: cpu_rmap: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
irq.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
ihex.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
igmp.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
genalloc.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
ethtool.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
...
Seven fixes; three in target, one on a sg error leg, two in qla2xxx
fixing warnings introduced in the last merge window and updating
MAINTAINERS and one in hisi_sas fixing a problem introduced by libata.
Signed-off-by: James E.J. Bottomley <jejb@linux.ibm.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iJwEABMIAEQWIQTnYEDbdso9F2cI+arnQslM7pishQUCXptd+CYcamFtZXMuYm90
dG9tbGV5QGhhbnNlbnBhcnRuZXJzaGlwLmNvbQAKCRDnQslM7pishbngAP46suq5
KFaRycXl1lmznlPmM7gyFfszxDV3hp9SusFrzgEAxV4S6vdgEsF2pd5F6EYZoV0i
eCPKR6qDY4SaiUcGFRA=
=B9UG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag 'scsi-fixes' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi
Pull SCSI fixes from James Bottomley:
"Seven fixes: three in target, one on a sg error leg, two in qla2xxx
fixing warnings introduced in the last merge window and updating
MAINTAINERS and one in hisi_sas fixing a problem introduced by libata"
* tag 'scsi-fixes' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi:
scsi: sg: add sg_remove_request in sg_common_write
scsi: target: tcmu: reset_ring should reset TCMU_DEV_BIT_BROKEN
scsi: target: fix PR IN / READ FULL STATUS for FC
scsi: target: Write NULL to *port_nexus_ptr if no ISID
scsi: MAINTAINERS: Update qla2xxx FC-SCSI driver maintainer
scsi: qla2xxx: Fix regression warnings
scsi: hisi_sas: Fix build error without SATA_HOST
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 7649773293 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Arvind Sankar
Zou Wei
Ard Biesheuvel
Atish Patra
Linus Torvalds
Brian Geffon
Gustavo A. R. Silva