All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>
To: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH][next] drm/i915/guc: Replace zero-length arrays with flexible-array members
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 13:42:57 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y72/wTm7eIIylTqf@work> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y728SwYZeThQzohb@intel.com>

On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 02:28:11PM -0500, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 10:44:53AM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > Zero-length arrays are deprecated[1] and we are moving towards
> > adopting C99 flexible-array members, instead. So, replace zero-length
> > arrays in a couple of structures (three, actually) with flex-array
> > members.
> > 
> > This helps with the ongoing efforts to tighten the FORTIFY_SOURCE
> > routines on memcpy() and help us make progress towards globally
> > enabling -fstrict-flex-arrays=3 [2].
> > 
> > Link: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/deprecated.html#zero-length-and-one-element-arrays [1]
> > Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-October/602902.html [2]
> > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/78
> > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@kernel.org>
> 
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h | 6 +++---
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h
> > index 3624abfd22d1..9d589c28f40f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h
> > @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ struct guc_debug_capture_list_header {
> >  
> >  struct guc_debug_capture_list {
> >  	struct guc_debug_capture_list_header header;
> > -	struct guc_mmio_reg regs[0];
> > +	struct guc_mmio_reg regs[];
> >  } __packed;
> >  
> >  /**
> > @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ struct guc_state_capture_header_t {
> >  
> >  struct guc_state_capture_t {
> >  	struct guc_state_capture_header_t header;
> > -	struct guc_mmio_reg mmio_entries[0];
> > +	struct guc_mmio_reg mmio_entries[];
> >  } __packed;
> >  
> >  enum guc_capture_group_types {
> > @@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ struct guc_state_capture_group_header_t {
> >  /* this is the top level structure where an error-capture dump starts */
> >  struct guc_state_capture_group_t {
> >  	struct guc_state_capture_group_header_t grp_header;
> > -	struct guc_state_capture_t capture_entries[0];
> > +	struct guc_state_capture_t capture_entries[];
> 
> Please notice we are currently using sizeof(struct ...).

Yep; I noticed that. :)

> Along with your proposed changes, shouldn't we also start using
> the struct_size() which already take the flexible array into account?

Not necessarily. In recent times, we don't include the struct_size
changes in the same patch as the flex-array transformation. That's
usually a follow-up patch.

--
Gustavo

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>
To: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
	Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
	Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>,
	David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] drm/i915/guc: Replace zero-length arrays with flexible-array members
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 13:42:57 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y72/wTm7eIIylTqf@work> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y728SwYZeThQzohb@intel.com>

On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 02:28:11PM -0500, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 10:44:53AM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > Zero-length arrays are deprecated[1] and we are moving towards
> > adopting C99 flexible-array members, instead. So, replace zero-length
> > arrays in a couple of structures (three, actually) with flex-array
> > members.
> > 
> > This helps with the ongoing efforts to tighten the FORTIFY_SOURCE
> > routines on memcpy() and help us make progress towards globally
> > enabling -fstrict-flex-arrays=3 [2].
> > 
> > Link: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/deprecated.html#zero-length-and-one-element-arrays [1]
> > Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-October/602902.html [2]
> > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/78
> > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@kernel.org>
> 
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h | 6 +++---
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h
> > index 3624abfd22d1..9d589c28f40f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h
> > @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ struct guc_debug_capture_list_header {
> >  
> >  struct guc_debug_capture_list {
> >  	struct guc_debug_capture_list_header header;
> > -	struct guc_mmio_reg regs[0];
> > +	struct guc_mmio_reg regs[];
> >  } __packed;
> >  
> >  /**
> > @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ struct guc_state_capture_header_t {
> >  
> >  struct guc_state_capture_t {
> >  	struct guc_state_capture_header_t header;
> > -	struct guc_mmio_reg mmio_entries[0];
> > +	struct guc_mmio_reg mmio_entries[];
> >  } __packed;
> >  
> >  enum guc_capture_group_types {
> > @@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ struct guc_state_capture_group_header_t {
> >  /* this is the top level structure where an error-capture dump starts */
> >  struct guc_state_capture_group_t {
> >  	struct guc_state_capture_group_header_t grp_header;
> > -	struct guc_state_capture_t capture_entries[0];
> > +	struct guc_state_capture_t capture_entries[];
> 
> Please notice we are currently using sizeof(struct ...).

Yep; I noticed that. :)

> Along with your proposed changes, shouldn't we also start using
> the struct_size() which already take the flexible array into account?

Not necessarily. In recent times, we don't include the struct_size
changes in the same patch as the flex-array transformation. That's
usually a follow-up patch.

--
Gustavo

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>
To: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] drm/i915/guc: Replace zero-length arrays with flexible-array members
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 13:42:57 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y72/wTm7eIIylTqf@work> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y728SwYZeThQzohb@intel.com>

On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 02:28:11PM -0500, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 10:44:53AM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > Zero-length arrays are deprecated[1] and we are moving towards
> > adopting C99 flexible-array members, instead. So, replace zero-length
> > arrays in a couple of structures (three, actually) with flex-array
> > members.
> > 
> > This helps with the ongoing efforts to tighten the FORTIFY_SOURCE
> > routines on memcpy() and help us make progress towards globally
> > enabling -fstrict-flex-arrays=3 [2].
> > 
> > Link: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/deprecated.html#zero-length-and-one-element-arrays [1]
> > Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-October/602902.html [2]
> > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/78
> > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@kernel.org>
> 
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h | 6 +++---
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h
> > index 3624abfd22d1..9d589c28f40f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/guc_capture_fwif.h
> > @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ struct guc_debug_capture_list_header {
> >  
> >  struct guc_debug_capture_list {
> >  	struct guc_debug_capture_list_header header;
> > -	struct guc_mmio_reg regs[0];
> > +	struct guc_mmio_reg regs[];
> >  } __packed;
> >  
> >  /**
> > @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ struct guc_state_capture_header_t {
> >  
> >  struct guc_state_capture_t {
> >  	struct guc_state_capture_header_t header;
> > -	struct guc_mmio_reg mmio_entries[0];
> > +	struct guc_mmio_reg mmio_entries[];
> >  } __packed;
> >  
> >  enum guc_capture_group_types {
> > @@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ struct guc_state_capture_group_header_t {
> >  /* this is the top level structure where an error-capture dump starts */
> >  struct guc_state_capture_group_t {
> >  	struct guc_state_capture_group_header_t grp_header;
> > -	struct guc_state_capture_t capture_entries[0];
> > +	struct guc_state_capture_t capture_entries[];
> 
> Please notice we are currently using sizeof(struct ...).

Yep; I noticed that. :)

> Along with your proposed changes, shouldn't we also start using
> the struct_size() which already take the flexible array into account?

Not necessarily. In recent times, we don't include the struct_size
changes in the same patch as the flex-array transformation. That's
usually a follow-up patch.

--
Gustavo

  reply	other threads:[~2023-01-10 19:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-10 16:44 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH][next] drm/i915/guc: Replace zero-length arrays with flexible-array members Gustavo A. R. Silva
2023-01-10 16:44 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2023-01-10 16:44 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2023-01-10 19:28 ` [Intel-gfx] " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-01-10 19:28   ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-01-10 19:28   ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-01-10 19:42   ` Gustavo A. R. Silva [this message]
2023-01-10 19:42     ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2023-01-10 19:42     ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2023-01-11  9:16     ` [Intel-gfx] " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-01-11  9:16       ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-01-11  9:16       ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-01-10 20:10 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2023-01-11  4:57 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " 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=Y72/wTm7eIIylTqf@work \
    --to=gustavoars@kernel.org \
    --cc=airlied@gmail.com \
    --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
    --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.