All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>,
	Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
	Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
	David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] drm: i915_drm.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2020 11:27:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h7z4pj0g.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200303220636.GA2788@embeddedor>

On Tue, 03 Mar 2020, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com> 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:

My earlier question about making the change in uapi was really about
potentially bumping up userspace compiler requirements, though I did not
actually say so. :)

I guess effectively uapi already requires C99 to build? And we
(i915_drm.h) have both [0] and []. So go for it.

What's your baseline? I think you've missed one instance of struct
i915_engine_class_instance engines[0];

BR,
Jani.


>
> 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 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
>
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
> ---
>  include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> index 2813e579b480..413d923b332a 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> @@ -1729,7 +1729,7 @@ struct i915_context_engines_load_balance {
>  
>  	__u64 mbz64; /* reserved for future use; must be zero */
>  
> -	struct i915_engine_class_instance engines[0];
> +	struct i915_engine_class_instance engines[];
>  } __attribute__((packed));
>  
>  #define I915_DEFINE_CONTEXT_ENGINES_LOAD_BALANCE(name__, N__) struct { \
> @@ -1767,7 +1767,7 @@ struct i915_context_engines_bond {
>  	__u64 flags; /* all undefined flags must be zero */
>  	__u64 mbz64[4]; /* reserved for future use; must be zero */
>  
> -	struct i915_engine_class_instance engines[0];
> +	struct i915_engine_class_instance engines[];
>  } __attribute__((packed));
>  
>  #define I915_DEFINE_CONTEXT_ENGINES_BOND(name__, N__) struct { \

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>,
	Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
	Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
	David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH][next] drm: i915_drm.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2020 11:27:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h7z4pj0g.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200303220636.GA2788@embeddedor>

On Tue, 03 Mar 2020, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com> 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:

My earlier question about making the change in uapi was really about
potentially bumping up userspace compiler requirements, though I did not
actually say so. :)

I guess effectively uapi already requires C99 to build? And we
(i915_drm.h) have both [0] and []. So go for it.

What's your baseline? I think you've missed one instance of struct
i915_engine_class_instance engines[0];

BR,
Jani.


>
> 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 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
>
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
> ---
>  include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> index 2813e579b480..413d923b332a 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> @@ -1729,7 +1729,7 @@ struct i915_context_engines_load_balance {
>  
>  	__u64 mbz64; /* reserved for future use; must be zero */
>  
> -	struct i915_engine_class_instance engines[0];
> +	struct i915_engine_class_instance engines[];
>  } __attribute__((packed));
>  
>  #define I915_DEFINE_CONTEXT_ENGINES_LOAD_BALANCE(name__, N__) struct { \
> @@ -1767,7 +1767,7 @@ struct i915_context_engines_bond {
>  	__u64 flags; /* all undefined flags must be zero */
>  	__u64 mbz64[4]; /* reserved for future use; must be zero */
>  
> -	struct i915_engine_class_instance engines[0];
> +	struct i915_engine_class_instance engines[];
>  } __attribute__((packed));
>  
>  #define I915_DEFINE_CONTEXT_ENGINES_BOND(name__, N__) struct { \

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>,
	Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
	Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
	David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] drm: i915_drm.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2020 11:27:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h7z4pj0g.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200303220636.GA2788@embeddedor>

On Tue, 03 Mar 2020, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com> 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:

My earlier question about making the change in uapi was really about
potentially bumping up userspace compiler requirements, though I did not
actually say so. :)

I guess effectively uapi already requires C99 to build? And we
(i915_drm.h) have both [0] and []. So go for it.

What's your baseline? I think you've missed one instance of struct
i915_engine_class_instance engines[0];

BR,
Jani.


>
> 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 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
>
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
> ---
>  include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> index 2813e579b480..413d923b332a 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> @@ -1729,7 +1729,7 @@ struct i915_context_engines_load_balance {
>  
>  	__u64 mbz64; /* reserved for future use; must be zero */
>  
> -	struct i915_engine_class_instance engines[0];
> +	struct i915_engine_class_instance engines[];
>  } __attribute__((packed));
>  
>  #define I915_DEFINE_CONTEXT_ENGINES_LOAD_BALANCE(name__, N__) struct { \
> @@ -1767,7 +1767,7 @@ struct i915_context_engines_bond {
>  	__u64 flags; /* all undefined flags must be zero */
>  	__u64 mbz64[4]; /* reserved for future use; must be zero */
>  
> -	struct i915_engine_class_instance engines[0];
> +	struct i915_engine_class_instance engines[];
>  } __attribute__((packed));
>  
>  #define I915_DEFINE_CONTEXT_ENGINES_BOND(name__, N__) struct { \

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-03-04  9:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-03 22:06 [PATCH][next] drm: i915_drm.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member Gustavo A. R. Silva
2020-03-03 22:06 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2020-03-03 22:06 ` [Intel-gfx] " Gustavo A. R. Silva
2020-03-04  3:38 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.DOCS: warning for " Patchwork
2020-03-04  3:47 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2020-03-04  9:27 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2020-03-04  9:27   ` [PATCH][next] " Jani Nikula
2020-03-04  9:27   ` [Intel-gfx] " Jani Nikula
2020-03-04 20:14 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: success for " Patchwork

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87h7z4pj0g.fsf@intel.com \
    --to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=airlied@linux.ie \
    --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=gustavo@embeddedor.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.