Skip to content

K
Kernel

openeuler / Kernel
1 年多 前同步成功

通知 8
Star 0
Fork 0
K
Kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 30 4月, 2020 1 次提交
  3. 29 4月, 2020 3 次提交
    • O
      NFSv4.1: fix handling of backchannel binding in BIND_CONN_TO_SESSION · dff58530
      由 Olga Kornievskaia 提交于 
      Currently, if the client sends BIND_CONN_TO_SESSION with
NFS4_CDFC4_FORE_OR_BOTH but only gets NFS4_CDFS4_FORE back it ignores
that it wasn't able to enable a backchannel.

To make sure, the client sends BIND_CONN_TO_SESSION as the first
operation on the connections (ie., no other session compounds haven't
been sent before), and if the client's request to bind the backchannel
is not satisfied, then reset the connection and retry.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: NOlga Kornievskaia <kolga@netapp.com>
Signed-off-by: NTrond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com>
      dff58530
    • N
      SUNRPC: defer slow parts of rpc_free_client() to a workqueue. · 7c4310ff
      由 NeilBrown 提交于 
      The rpciod workqueue is on the write-out path for freeing dirty memory,
so it is important that it never block waiting for memory to be
allocated - this can lead to a deadlock.

rpc_execute() - which is often called by an rpciod work item - calls
rcp_task_release_client() which can lead to rpc_free_client().

rpc_free_client() makes two calls which could potentially block wating
for memory allocation.

rpc_clnt_debugfs_unregister() calls into debugfs and will block while
any of the debugfs files are being accessed.  In particular it can block
while any of the 'open' methods are being called and all of these use
malloc for one thing or another.  So this can deadlock if the memory
allocation waits for NFS to complete some writes via rpciod.

rpc_clnt_remove_pipedir() can take the inode_lock() and while it isn't
obvious that memory allocations can happen while the lock it held, it is
safer to assume they might and to not let rpciod call
rpc_clnt_remove_pipedir().

So this patch moves these two calls (together with the final kfree() and
rpciod_down()) into a work-item to be run from the system work-queue.
rpciod can continue its important work, and the final stages of the free
can happen whenever they happen.

I have seen this deadlock on a 4.12 based kernel where debugfs used
synchronize_srcu() when removing objects.  synchronize_srcu() requires a
workqueue and there were no free workther threads and none could be
allocated.  While debugsfs no longer uses SRCU, I believe the deadlock
is still possible.
Signed-off-by: NNeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: NTrond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com>
      7c4310ff
    • M
      drm/amdgpu: add tiling flags from Mesa · c938628c
      由 Marek Olšák 提交于 
      DCC_INDEPENDENT_128B is needed for displayble DCC on gfx10.
SCANOUT is not needed by the kernel, but Mesa uses it.
Signed-off-by: NMarek Olšák <marek.olsak@amd.com>
Acked-by: NAlex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: NAlex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
      c938628c
  5. 27 4月, 2020 2 次提交
  7. 25 4月, 2020 1 次提交
  9. 24 4月, 2020 1 次提交
  11. 23 4月, 2020 4 次提交
  13. 22 4月, 2020 3 次提交
    • J
      pnp: Use list_for_each_entry() instead of open coding · 01b2bafe
      由 Jason Gunthorpe 提交于 
      Aside from good practice, this avoids a warning from gcc 10:

./include/linux/kernel.h:997:3: warning: array subscript -31 is outside array bounds of ‘struct list_head[1]’ [-Warray-bounds]
  997 |  ((type *)(__mptr - offsetof(type, member))); })
      |  ~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/linux/list.h:493:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘container_of’
  493 |  container_of(ptr, type, member)
      |  ^~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/linux/pnp.h:275:30: note: in expansion of macro ‘list_entry’
  275 | #define global_to_pnp_dev(n) list_entry(n, struct pnp_dev, global_list)
      |                              ^~~~~~~~~~
./include/linux/pnp.h:281:11: note: in expansion of macro ‘global_to_pnp_dev’
  281 |  (dev) != global_to_pnp_dev(&pnp_global); \
      |           ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c:189:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘pnp_for_each_dev’
  189 |  pnp_for_each_dev(dev) {

Because the common code doesn't cast the starting list_head to the
containing struct.
Signed-off-by: NJason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
[ rjw: Whitespace adjustments ]
Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
      01b2bafe
    • V
      net: stmmac: Enable SERDES power up/down sequence · b9663b7c
      由 Voon Weifeng 提交于 
      This patch is to enable Intel SERDES power up/down sequence. The SERDES
converts 8/10 bits data to SGMII signal. Below is an example of
HW configuration for SGMII mode. The SERDES is located in the PHY IF
in the diagram below.

<-----------------GBE Controller---------->|<--External PHY chip-->
+----------+         +----+            +---+           +----------+
|   EQoS   | <-GMII->| DW | < ------ > |PHY| <-SGMII-> | External |
|   MAC    |         |xPCS|            |IF |           | PHY      |
+----------+         +----+            +---+           +----------+
       ^               ^                 ^                ^
       |               |                 |                |
       +---------------------MDIO-------------------------+

PHY IF configuration and status registers are accessible through
mdio address 0x15 which is defined as mdio_adhoc_addr. During D0,
The driver will need to power up PHY IF by changing the power state
to P0. Likewise, for D3, the driver sets PHY IF power state to P3.
Signed-off-by: NVoon Weifeng <weifeng.voon@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: NOng Boon Leong <boon.leong.ong@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      b9663b7c
    • J
      vmalloc: fix remap_vmalloc_range() bounds checks · bdebd6a2
      由 Jann Horn 提交于 
      remap_vmalloc_range() has had various issues with the bounds checks it
promises to perform ("This function checks that addr is a valid
vmalloc'ed area, and that it is big enough to cover the vma") over time,
e.g.:

 - not detecting pgoff<<PAGE_SHIFT overflow

 - not detecting (pgoff<<PAGE_SHIFT)+usize overflow

 - not checking whether addr and addr+(pgoff<<PAGE_SHIFT) are the same
   vmalloc allocation

 - comparing a potentially wildly out-of-bounds pointer with the end of
   the vmalloc region

In particular, since commit fc970227 ("bpf: Add mmap() support for
BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY"), unprivileged users can cause kernel null pointer
dereferences by calling mmap() on a BPF map with a size that is bigger
than the distance from the start of the BPF map to the end of the
address space.

This could theoretically be used as a kernel ASLR bypass, by using
whether mmap() with a given offset oopses or returns an error code to
perform a binary search over the possible address range.

To allow remap_vmalloc_range_partial() to verify that addr and
addr+(pgoff<<PAGE_SHIFT) are in the same vmalloc region, pass the offset
to remap_vmalloc_range_partial() instead of adding it to the pointer in
remap_vmalloc_range().

In remap_vmalloc_range_partial(), fix the check against
get_vm_area_size() by using size comparisons instead of pointer
comparisons, and add checks for pgoff.

Fixes: 83342314 ("[PATCH] mm: introduce remap_vmalloc_range()")
Signed-off-by: NJann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Cc: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Cc: KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200415222312.236431-1-jannh@google.comSigned-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      bdebd6a2
  15. 21 4月, 2020 2 次提交
  17. 20 4月, 2020 2 次提交
  19. 19 4月, 2020 21 次提交
    • E
      tcp: cache line align MAX_TCP_HEADER · 9bacd256
      由 Eric Dumazet 提交于 
      TCP stack is dumb in how it cooks its output packets.

Depending on MAX_HEADER value, we might chose a bad ending point
for the headers.

If we align the end of TCP headers to cache line boundary, we
make sure to always use the smallest number of cache lines,
which always help.
Signed-off-by: NEric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: Soheil Hassas Yeganeh <soheil@google.com>
Acked-by: NSoheil Hassas Yeganeh <soheil@google.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      9bacd256
    • G
      xattr.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 43951585
      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>
      43951585
    • G
      uapi: linux: fiemap.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 6e88abb8
      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>
      6e88abb8
    • G
      uapi: linux: dlm_device.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · d6cdad87
      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>
      d6cdad87
    • G
      tpm_eventlog.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 06ccf63d
      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>
      06ccf63d
    • G
      ti_wilink_st.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 4ea19ecf
      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>
      4ea19ecf
    • G
      swap.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 16c3380f
      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>
      16c3380f
    • G
      skbuff.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 5c91aa1d
      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>
      5c91aa1d
    • G
      sched: topology.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · fe946db6
      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>
      fe946db6
    • G
      rslib.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 9dd8bb5f
      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>
      9dd8bb5f
    • G
      rio.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · a1c4b924
      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>
      a1c4b924
    • G
      posix_acl.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 70f1451e
      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>
      70f1451e
    • G
      platform_data: wilco-ec.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 1223f3db
      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>
      1223f3db
    • G
      memcontrol.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 307ed94c
      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>
      307ed94c
    • G
      list_lru.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 859b4941
      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>
      859b4941
    • G
      lib: cpu_rmap: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 31232272
      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>
      31232272
    • G
      irq.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 7856e9f1
      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>
      7856e9f1
    • G
      ihex.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 1d9e13e8
      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>
      1d9e13e8
    • G
      igmp.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 0ead3364
      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>
      0ead3364
    • G
      genalloc.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 89f60a5d
      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>
      89f60a5d
    • G
      ethtool.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member · 5299a11a
      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>
      5299a11a