lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] crypto: s5p-sss - Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 at 08:09, Kamil Konieczny <k.konieczny@samsung.com> wrote:
>
> On 13.02.2020 18:21, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > 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://protect2.fireeye.com/url?k=7fbec6f4-22720d30-7fbf4dbb-0cc47a314e9a-2a4d03985644c7ed&u=https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
> > [3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c b/drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c
> > index d66e20a2f54c..2a16800d2579 100644
> > --- a/drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c
> > +++ b/drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c
> > @@ -369,7 +369,7 @@ struct s5p_hash_reqctx {
> > bool error;
> >
> > u32 bufcnt;
> > - u8 buffer[0];
> > + u8 buffer[];
> > };
> >
> > /**
> >
>
> Looks good to me.
>
> Acked-by: Kamil Konieczny <k.konieczny@samsung.com>

Why not making it simple/obvious u8 *buffer? Or fixed length (BUFLEN length)?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-02-14 09:23    [W:0.069 / U:1.360 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site