[PATCH][next] xdp: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member

[PATCH][next] xdp: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member

[Gustavo A. R. Silva]

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")

Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
---
 net/xdp/xsk_queue.h | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/xdp/xsk_queue.h b/net/xdp/xsk_queue.h
index 89a01ac4e079..b50bb5c76da5 100644
--- a/net/xdp/xsk_queue.h
+++ b/net/xdp/xsk_queue.h
@@ -19,13 +19,13 @@ struct xdp_ring {
 /* Used for the RX and TX queues for packets */
 struct xdp_rxtx_ring {
 	struct xdp_ring ptrs;
-	struct xdp_desc desc[0] ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
+	struct xdp_desc desc[] ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
 };
 
 /* Used for the fill and completion queues for buffers */
 struct xdp_umem_ring {
 	struct xdp_ring ptrs;
-	u64 desc[0] ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
+	u64 desc[] ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
 };
 
 struct xsk_queue {
-- 
2.25.0

Re: [PATCH] [next] xdp: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member

[Jonathan Lemon]

On 28 Feb 2020, at 5:19, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:

> The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
> extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
> variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
> introduced in C99:
>
> struct foo {
>         int stuff;
>         struct boo array[];
> };
>
> By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
> in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
> will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
> inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
>
> Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
> this change:
>
> "Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
> may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
> zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
>
> This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
>
> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
> [2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
> [3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
>
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>

Acked-by: Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@gmail.com>

Re: [PATCH] [next] xdp: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member

[Björn Töpel]

On 2020-02-28 18:14, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
> 
> 
> On 28 Feb 2020, at 5:19, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> 
>> The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
>> extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
>> variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
>> introduced in C99:
>>
>> struct foo {
>>          int stuff;
>>          struct boo array[];
>> };
>>
>> By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
>> in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
>> will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
>> inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
>>
>> Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
>> this change:
>>
>> "Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
>> may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
>> zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
>>
>> This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
>>
>> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
>> [2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
>> [3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@gmail.com>
> 

Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>

Re: [PATCH][next] xdp: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member

[David Miller]

From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 07:19:07 -0600

> The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
> extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
> variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
> introduced in C99:
> 
> struct foo {
>         int stuff;
>         struct boo array[];
> };
> 
> By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
> in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
> will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
> inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
> 
> Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
> this change:
> 
> "Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
> may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
> zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
> 
> This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
> 
> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
> [2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
> [3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>

Applied.