Re: [PATCH 4/4] wifi: ath11k: Use DECLARE_FLEX_ARRAY() for ath11k_htc_record

["Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>]

On 12/5/23 09:29, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@quicinc.com> writes:
> 
>> On 11/27/2023 8:23 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/27/23 10:14, Jeff Johnson wrote:
>>>> Transform the zero-length array in ath11k_htc_record into a proper
>>>> flexible array via the DECLARE_FLEX_ARRAY() macro. This helps with
>>>> ongoing efforts to globally enable -Warray-bounds.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@quicinc.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/htc.h | 2 +-
>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/htc.h b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/htc.h
>>>> index 84971cc9251c..e0434b29df70 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/htc.h
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/htc.h
>>>> @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ struct ath11k_htc_credit_report {
>>>>    struct ath11k_htc_record {
>>>>    	struct ath11k_htc_record_hdr hdr;
>>>>    	union {
>>>> -		struct ath11k_htc_credit_report credit_report[0];
>>>> +		DECLARE_FLEX_ARRAY(struct ath11k_htc_credit_report, credit_report);
>>>>    	};
>>>
>>> Why not removing the `union` and just do a direct transformation [0] -> [ ] ?
>>
>> No reason other than staying consistent with ath10k.
>> Will see if Kalle has an opinion on this.
> 
> Yeah, I don't see the need for the union and I removed it in the pending
> branch:
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/ath.git/commit/?h=pending&id=a2faeea1fe0635563187e7821a6d0baf7b40f2c6
> 
> Does it look ok?
> 

Nope.

A direct transformation is just fine:

-	union {
-		struct ath11k_htc_credit_report credit_report[0];
-	};
+	struct ath11k_htc_credit_report credit_report[];

There is no need for DFA in this situation.

Thanks
--
Gustavo