Re: [PATCH] wifi: brcmfmac: Adjust n_channels usage for __counted_by

[Arend Van Spriel <aspriel@gmail.com>]

On 2/2/2024 10:58 AM, Arend Van Spriel wrote:
> On 2/1/2024 11:04 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>>> After commit e3eac9f32ec0 ("wifi: cfg80211: Annotate struct
>>> cfg80211_scan_request with __counted_by"), the compiler may enforce
>>> dynamic array indexing of req->channels to stay below n_channels. As a
>>> result, n_channels needs to be increased _before_ accessing the newly
>>> added array index. Increment it first, then use "i" for the prior index.
>>> Solves this warning in the coming GCC that has __counted_by support:
>>>
>>> ../drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c: In 
>>> function 'brcmf_internal_escan_add_info':
>>> ../drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c:3783:46: warning: operation on 'req->
>>> n_channels' may be undefined [-Wsequence-point]
>>>   3783 |                 req->channels[req->n_channels++] = chan;
>>>        |                               ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~
>>>
>>> Fixes: e3eac9f32ec0 ("wifi: cfg80211: Annotate struct 
>>> cfg80211_scan_request with __counted_by")
>>> Cc: Arend van Spriel <aspriel@gmail.com>
>>> Cc: Franky Lin <franky.lin@broadcom.com>
>>> Cc: Hante Meuleman <hante.meuleman@broadcom.com>
>>> Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
>>> Cc: Chi-hsien Lin <chi-hsien.lin@infineon.com>
>>> Cc: Ian Lin <ian.lin@infineon.com>
>>> Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Wright Feng <wright.feng@cypress.com>
>>> Cc: Hector Martin <marcan@marcan.st>
>>> Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
>>> Cc: brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@broadcom.com
>>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>>> Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
>>> Reviewed-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@kernel.org>
>>
>> I'm planning to queue this for wireless tree. Arend, ack?
> 
> This slipped past my broadcom email. As the Fixes commit is in 6.7 I 
> would say ACK.

Cc: to stable?

Gr. AvS