From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0143C4332F for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:54:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234053AbiKRAyh (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Nov 2022 19:54:37 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53388 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S240770AbiKRAyf (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Nov 2022 19:54:35 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-x62e.google.com (mail-pl1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCD0C85EED for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 16:54:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pl1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id v17so3221455plo.1 for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 16:54:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=XvIoWSd0xrw6RZJQp73B+S5uCJ5LMxazrUmMxPfNjuQ=; b=Ywx/QwtKH8VAB4UddTVRkYxOW2k+PyRwVVpR4TEzkhDl4DjNzjqniVbWpNQeGC15uz THTgtgOC2tJtLxcn+N6qnN3Uy3FVT4qmUSr3XOZgiLlJCWs0v/93AF1Vt/H6ei2/0on5 d7zw7FPkZM/4CTydhHhG2fL1TGCDWupJAjNhw= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=XvIoWSd0xrw6RZJQp73B+S5uCJ5LMxazrUmMxPfNjuQ=; b=3IehGahcdl3hQ9B+WKy/k9fT1Su7htufhzTa811gfOHlKQV7MX4I4IyvX30zpPFy0Y U07FuQ8bEywfoml5HmFsqbgjytBEjI5ALbQLlvntsyqsH0OWNe0GYyWKVRf0Qx+lj5kj 8xALspKTfKAVc6IoRbvfMqXR8eALr0fWPSMAmMrbXFHtN3+f2PDEmkZTqVY7Y7Nz0fZ/ 1RsMMFZZaDK9D3AaaWr6H/YNPs8BH50AL8neX+jtGtFyH4PS76FAmVMJcb3/reeuAGzE QSY96VbygHZBrhCOddEpxD7PtADBbuXcqJ3kd+9J1BQClJUlWMm1biYxoT/l/C/7erM8 ujAw== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pk5Kk8VJzgkf8hVjvmF8qr38GVtSEMpW51xfZKSl94R+/0LkCZy KIiPUIGtVd1iGg7xxuse2X3mcw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf6l8TeoWF0zZxdx0LT95pkl13FOnju8C6AgmTu9j8vNo494eN13cvZRXCxp+hVgpR5ied3LDw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:c652:b0:186:af8e:7ed4 with SMTP id s18-20020a170902c65200b00186af8e7ed4mr5223346pls.7.1668732874435; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 16:54:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from www.outflux.net (198-0-35-241-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [198.0.35.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j6-20020a17090276c600b00172b87d9770sm2073855plt.81.2022.11.17.16.54.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 17 Nov 2022 16:54:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 16:54:33 -0800 From: Kees Cook To: sdf@google.com Cc: wangkailong@jari.cn, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] samples/seccomp: fix array_size.cocci warning Message-ID: <202211171653.0E3BA8E71B@keescook> References: <2b3f2420.130.184706d34e6.Coremail.wangkailong@jari.cn> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 09:15:35AM -0800, sdf@google.com wrote: > On 11/13, wangkailong@jari.cn wrote: > > Fix following coccicheck warning: > > > samples/seccomp/bpf-fancy.c:83:39-40: WARNING: Use ARRAY_SIZE > > samples/seccomp/bpf-fancy.c:86:44-45: WARNING: Use ARRAY_SIZE > > Not sure this should go via bpf tree. CC'ed Kees > > > Signed-off-by: KaiLong Wang > > --- > > samples/seccomp/bpf-fancy.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > diff --git a/samples/seccomp/bpf-fancy.c b/samples/seccomp/bpf-fancy.c > > index 1ccb435025b6..548f038924d6 100644 > > --- a/samples/seccomp/bpf-fancy.c > > +++ b/samples/seccomp/bpf-fancy.c > > @@ -80,10 +80,10 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) > > }; > > struct sock_fprog prog = { > > .filter = filter, > > - .len = (unsigned short)(sizeof(filter)/sizeof(filter[0])), > > + .len = (unsigned short)(ARRAY_SIZE(filter)), > > }; > > ssize_t bytes; > > - bpf_resolve_jumps(&l, filter, sizeof(filter)/sizeof(*filter)); > > + bpf_resolve_jumps(&l, filter, ARRAY_SIZE(filter)); Hm, this is the "samples" tree, so this was intentionally avoiding these kinds of kernel-isms, but perhaps that doesn't realistically matter? -Kees > > > if (prctl(PR_SET_NO_NEW_PRIVS, 1, 0, 0, 0)) { > > perror("prctl(NO_NEW_PRIVS)"); > > -- > > 2.25.1 -- Kees Cook