- 20 4月, 2020 10 次提交
-
-
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/clk/linux由 Linus Torvalds 提交于
Pull clk fixes from Stephen Boyd: "Two build fixes for a couple clk drivers and a fix for the Unisoc serial clk where we want to keep it on for earlycon" * tag 'clk-fixes-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/clk/linux: clk: sprd: don't gate uart console clock clk: mmp2: fix link error without mmp2 clk: asm9260: fix __clk_hw_register_fixed_rate_with_accuracy typo
-
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip由 Linus Torvalds 提交于
Pull x86 and objtool fixes from Thomas Gleixner: "A set of fixes for x86 and objtool: objtool: - Ignore the double UD2 which is emitted in BUG() when CONFIG_UBSAN_TRAP is enabled. - Support clang non-section symbols in objtool ORC dump - Fix switch table detection in .text.unlikely - Make the BP scratch register warning more robust. x86: - Increase microcode maximum patch size for AMD to cope with new CPUs which have a larger patch size. - Fix a crash in the resource control filesystem when the removal of the default resource group is attempted. - Preserve Code and Data Prioritization enabled state accross CPU hotplug. - Update split lock cpu matching to use the new X86_MATCH macros. - Change the split lock enumeration as Intel finaly decided that the IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES bits are not architectural contrary to what the SDM claims. !@#%$^! - Add Tremont CPU models to the split lock detection cpu match. - Add a missing static attribute to make sparse happy" * tag 'x86-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: x86/split_lock: Add Tremont family CPU models x86/split_lock: Bits in IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES are not architectural x86/resctrl: Preserve CDP enable over CPU hotplug x86/resctrl: Fix invalid attempt at removing the default resource group x86/split_lock: Update to use X86_MATCH_INTEL_FAM6_MODEL() x86/umip: Make umip_insns static x86/microcode/AMD: Increase microcode PATCH_MAX_SIZE objtool: Make BP scratch register warning more robust objtool: Fix switch table detection in .text.unlikely objtool: Support Clang non-section symbols in ORC generation objtool: Support Clang non-section symbols in ORC dump objtool: Fix CONFIG_UBSAN_TRAP unreachable warnings
-
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip由 Linus Torvalds 提交于
Pull time namespace fix from Thomas Gleixner: "An update for the proc interface of time namespaces: Use symbolic names instead of clockid numbers. The usability nuisance of numbers was noticed by Michael when polishing the man page" * tag 'timers-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: proc, time/namespace: Show clock symbolic names in /proc/pid/timens_offsets
-
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip由 Linus Torvalds 提交于
Pull perf tooling fixes and updates from Thomas Gleixner: - Fix the header line of perf stat output for '--metric-only --per-socket' - Fix the python build with clang - The usual tools UAPI header synchronization * tag 'perf-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: tools headers: Synchronize linux/bits.h with the kernel sources tools headers: Adopt verbatim copy of compiletime_assert() from kernel sources tools headers: Update x86's syscall_64.tbl with the kernel sources tools headers UAPI: Sync drm/i915_drm.h with the kernel sources tools headers UAPI: Update tools's copy of drm.h headers tools headers kvm: Sync linux/kvm.h with the kernel sources tools headers UAPI: Sync linux/fscrypt.h with the kernel sources tools include UAPI: Sync linux/vhost.h with the kernel sources tools arch x86: Sync asm/cpufeatures.h with the kernel sources tools headers UAPI: Sync linux/mman.h with the kernel tools headers UAPI: Sync sched.h with the kernel tools headers: Update linux/vdso.h and grab a copy of vdso/const.h perf stat: Fix no metric header if --per-socket and --metric-only set perf python: Check if clang supports -fno-semantic-interposition tools arch x86: Sync the msr-index.h copy with the kernel sources
-
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip由 Linus Torvalds 提交于
Pull irq fixes from Thomas Gleixner: "A set of fixes/updates for the interrupt subsystem: - Remove setup_irq() and remove_irq(). All users have been converted so remove them before new users surface. - A set of bugfixes for various interrupt chip drivers - Add a few missing static attributes to address sparse warnings" * tag 'irq-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: irqchip/irq-bcm7038-l1: Make bcm7038_l1_of_init() static irqchip/irq-mvebu-icu: Make legacy_bindings static irqchip/meson-gpio: Fix HARDIRQ-safe -> HARDIRQ-unsafe lock order irqchip/sifive-plic: Fix maximum priority threshold value irqchip/ti-sci-inta: Fix processing of masked irqs irqchip/mbigen: Free msi_desc on device teardown irqchip/gic-v4.1: Update effective affinity of virtual SGIs irqchip/gic-v4.1: Add support for VPENDBASER's Dirty+Valid signaling genirq: Remove setup_irq() and remove_irq()
-
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip由 Linus Torvalds 提交于
Pull scheduler fixes from Thomas Gleixner: "Two fixes for the scheduler: - Work around an uninitialized variable warning where GCC can't figure it out. - Allow 'isolcpus=' to skip unknown subparameters so that older kernels work with the commandline of a newer kernel. Improve the error output while at it" * tag 'sched-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: sched/vtime: Work around an unitialized variable warning sched/isolation: Allow "isolcpus=" to skip unknown sub-parameters
-
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip由 Linus Torvalds 提交于
Pull RCU fix from Thomas Gleixner: "A single bugfix for RCU to prevent taking a lock in NMI context" * tag 'core-urgent-2020-04-19' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: rcu: Don't acquire lock in NMI handler in rcu_nmi_enter_common()
-
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4由 Linus Torvalds 提交于
Pull ext4 fixes from Ted Ts'o: "Miscellaneous bug fixes and cleanups for ext4, including a fix for generic/388 in data=journal mode, removing some BUG_ON's, and cleaning up some compiler warnings" * tag 'ext4_for_linus_stable' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4: ext4: convert BUG_ON's to WARN_ON's in mballoc.c ext4: increase wait time needed before reuse of deleted inode numbers ext4: remove set but not used variable 'es' in ext4_jbd2.c ext4: remove set but not used variable 'es' ext4: do not zeroout extents beyond i_disksize ext4: fix return-value types in several function comments ext4: use non-movable memory for superblock readahead ext4: use matching invalidatepage in ext4_writepage
-
git://git.samba.org/sfrench/cifs-2.6由 Linus Torvalds 提交于
Pull cifs fixes from Steve French: "Three small smb3 fixes: two debug related (helping network tracing for SMB2 mounts, and the other removing an unintended debug line on signing failures), and one fixing a performance problem with 64K pages" * tag '5.7-rc-smb3-fixes' of git://git.samba.org/sfrench/cifs-2.6: smb3: remove overly noisy debug line in signing errors cifs: improve read performance for page size 64KB & cache=strict & vers=2.1+ cifs: dump the session id and keys also for SMB2 sessions
-
由 Linus Torvalds 提交于
Merge tag 'flexible-array-member-5.7-rc2' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gustavoars/linux Pull flexible-array member conversion from Gustavo 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] sizeof(flexible-array-member) triggers a warning because flexible array members have incomplete type[1]. There are some instances of code in which the sizeof operator is being incorrectly/erroneously applied to zero-length arrays and the result is zero. Such instances may be hiding some bugs. So, this work (flexible-array member convertions) will also help to get completely rid of those sorts of issues. Notice that all of these patches have been baking in linux-next for quite a while now and, 238 more of these patches have already been merged into 5.7-rc1. There are a couple hundred more of these issues waiting to be addressed in the whole codebase" [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html [2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21 [3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") * tag 'flexible-array-member-5.7-rc2' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gustavoars/linux: (28 commits) xattr.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member uapi: linux: fiemap.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member uapi: linux: dlm_device.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member tpm_eventlog.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member ti_wilink_st.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member swap.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member skbuff.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member sched: topology.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member rslib.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member rio.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member posix_acl.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member platform_data: wilco-ec.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member memcontrol.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member list_lru.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member lib: cpu_rmap: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member irq.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member ihex.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member igmp.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member genalloc.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member ethtool.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member ...
-
- 19 4月, 2020 30 次提交
-
-
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi由 Linus Torvalds 提交于
Pull SCSI fixes from James Bottomley: "Seven fixes: three in target, one on a sg error leg, two in qla2xxx fixing warnings introduced in the last merge window and updating MAINTAINERS and one in hisi_sas fixing a problem introduced by libata" * tag 'scsi-fixes' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi: scsi: sg: add sg_remove_request in sg_common_write scsi: target: tcmu: reset_ring should reset TCMU_DEV_BIT_BROKEN scsi: target: fix PR IN / READ FULL STATUS for FC scsi: target: Write NULL to *port_nexus_ptr if no ISID scsi: MAINTAINERS: Update qla2xxx FC-SCSI driver maintainer scsi: qla2xxx: Fix regression warnings scsi: hisi_sas: Fix build error without SATA_HOST
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Gustavo A. R. Silva 提交于
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 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour") Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
-
由 Linus Torvalds 提交于
Merge tag 'hwmon-for-v5.7-rc2' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/groeck/linux-staging Pull hwmon fixes from Guenter Roeck: - Fix up chip IDs (isl68137) - error handling for invalid temperatures and use true module name (drivetemp) - Fix static symbol warnings (k10temp) - Use valid hwmon device name (jc42) * tag 'hwmon-for-v5.7-rc2' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/groeck/linux-staging: hwmon: (jc42) Fix name to have no illegal characters hwmon: (k10temp) make some symbols static hwmon: (drivetemp) Return -ENODATA for invalid temperatures hwmon: (drivetemp) Use drivetemp's true module name in Kconfig section hwmon: (pmbus/isl68137) Fix up chip IDs
-