From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kees Cook Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 19:59:30 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] randstruct: remove dead code in is_pure_ops_struct() Message-Id: <201907311259.D485EED2B7@keescook> List-Id: References: <281a65cc361512e3dc6c5deffa324f800eb907be.1564595346.git.kjw1627@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <281a65cc361512e3dc6c5deffa324f800eb907be.1564595346.git.kjw1627@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Joonwon Kang Cc: re.emese@gmail.com, kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, jinb.park7@gmail.com On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 03:01:49AM +0900, Joonwon Kang wrote: > Recursive declaration for struct which has member of the same struct > type, for example, > > struct foo { > struct foo f; > ... > }; > > is not allowed. So, it is unnecessary to check if a struct has this > kind of member. Is that the only case where this loop could happen? Seems also safe to just leave it as-is... -Kees > > Signed-off-by: Joonwon Kang > --- > scripts/gcc-plugins/randomize_layout_plugin.c | 3 --- > 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/scripts/gcc-plugins/randomize_layout_plugin.c b/scripts/gcc-plugins/randomize_layout_plugin.c > index bd29e4e7a524..e14efe23e645 100644 > --- a/scripts/gcc-plugins/randomize_layout_plugin.c > +++ b/scripts/gcc-plugins/randomize_layout_plugin.c > @@ -440,9 +440,6 @@ static int is_pure_ops_struct(const_tree node) > const_tree fieldtype = get_field_type(field); > enum tree_code code = TREE_CODE(fieldtype); > > - if (node = fieldtype) > - continue; > - > if (code = RECORD_TYPE || code = UNION_TYPE) { > if (!is_pure_ops_struct(fieldtype)) > return 0; > -- > 2.17.1 > -- Kees Cook