public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
	linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] hardening fixes for v6.6-rc3
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2023 20:49:21 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <202309222034.F2B777F55@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wg0C+eEm0Tegpvc1zZjcqkdG9L0ed10tg_rQ1-WZciMGA@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 04:55:45PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Sept 2023 at 09:59, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> > - Fix UAPI stddef.h to avoid C++-ism (Alexey Dobriyan)
> 
> Ugh. Did we really have to make two different versions of that define?
> 
> Ok, so C++ did something stupid wrt an empty struct. Fine.
> 
> But I think we could have still shared the same definition by just
> using the same 'zero-sized array' trick, regardless of any 'empty
> struct has a size in C++'.
> 
> IOW, wouldn't this just work universally, without any "two completely
> different versions" hack?
> 
> #define __DECLARE_FLEX_ARRAY(TYPE, NAME)        \
>         struct { \
>                 char __empty_ ## NAME[0]; \
>                 TYPE NAME[]; \
>         }
> 
> I didn't test. I'm just hating on that '#ifdef __cplusplus'.

Yeah, I had same thought[1], but in the end I left it the way Alexey
suggested for one decent reason, and one weak reason:

1) As discovered[2] while porting this helper to ACPICA, using a flexible
   array in a struct like this does not fly with MSVC, so for MSVC
   ingesting UAPI, having the separate struct is likely more robust.

2) __cplusplus is relatively common in UAPI headers already:
   $ git grep __cplusplus -- include/uapi | wc -l
   58

-Kees

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/202309151208.C99747375@keescook/
[2] https://github.com/acpica/acpica/pull/837

-- 
Kees Cook

  reply	other threads:[~2023-09-23  3:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-09-22 16:59 [GIT PULL] hardening fixes for v6.6-rc3 Kees Cook
2023-09-22 23:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-09-23  3:49   ` Kees Cook [this message]
2023-09-23 18:04     ` Linus Torvalds
2023-09-24 16:58       ` Alexey Dobriyan
2023-09-24 17:24         ` Linus Torvalds
2023-09-23 16:53   ` Alexey Dobriyan
2023-09-23 18:02     ` Linus Torvalds
2023-09-22 23:58 ` pr-tracker-bot

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=202309222034.F2B777F55@keescook \
    --to=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox