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. 29 4月, 2020 3 次提交
  3. 27 4月, 2020 4 次提交
  5. 26 4月, 2020 2 次提交
  7. 25 4月, 2020 2 次提交
  9. 24 4月, 2020 1 次提交
    • E
      net: napi: add hard irqs deferral feature · 6f8b12d6
      由 Eric Dumazet 提交于 
      Back in commit 3b47d303 ("net: gro: add a per device gro flush timer")
we added the ability to arm one high resolution timer, that we used
to keep not-complete packets in GRO engine a bit longer, hoping that further
frames might be added to them.

Since then, we added the napi_complete_done() interface, and commit
364b6055 ("net: busy-poll: return busypolling status to drivers")
allowed drivers to avoid re-arming NIC interrupts if we made a promise
that their NAPI poll() handler would be called in the near future.

This infrastructure can be leveraged, thanks to a new device parameter,
which allows to arm the napi hrtimer, instead of re-arming the device
hard IRQ.

We have noticed that on some servers with 32 RX queues or more, the chit-chat
between the NIC and the host caused by IRQ delivery and re-arming could hurt
throughput by ~20% on 100Gbit NIC.

In contrast, hrtimers are using local (percpu) resources and might have lower
cost.

The new tunable, named napi_defer_hard_irqs, is placed in the same hierarchy
than gro_flush_timeout (/sys/class/net/ethX/)

By default, both gro_flush_timeout and napi_defer_hard_irqs are zero.

This patch does not change the prior behavior of gro_flush_timeout
if used alone : NIC hard irqs should be rearmed as before.

One concrete usage can be :

echo 20000 >/sys/class/net/eth1/gro_flush_timeout
echo 10 >/sys/class/net/eth1/napi_defer_hard_irqs

If at least one packet is retired, then we will reset napi counter
to 10 (napi_defer_hard_irqs), ensuring at least 10 periodic scans
of the queue.

On busy queues, this should avoid NIC hard IRQ, while before this patch IRQ
avoidance was only possible if napi->poll() was exhausting its budget
and not call napi_complete_done().

This feature also can be used to work around some non-optimal NIC irq
coalescing strategies.

Having the ability to insert XX usec delays between each napi->poll()
can increase cache efficiency, since we increase batch sizes.

It also keeps serving cpus not idle too long, reducing tail latencies.
Co-developed-by: NLuigi Rizzo <lrizzo@google.com>
Signed-off-by: NEric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      6f8b12d6
  11. 23 4月, 2020 6 次提交
  13. 22 4月, 2020 4 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
    • L
      kernel/module: Hide vermagic header file from general use · 51161bfc
      由 Leon Romanovsky 提交于 
      VERMAGIC* definitions are not supposed to be used by the drivers,
see this [1] bug report, so introduce special define to guard inclusion
of this header file and define it in kernel/modules.h and in internal
script that generates *.mod.c files.

In-tree module build:
➜  kernel git:(vermagic) ✗ make clean
➜  kernel git:(vermagic) ✗ make M=drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5
➜  kernel git:(vermagic) ✗ modinfo drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mlx5_ib.ko
filename:	/images/leonro/src/kernel/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mlx5_ib.ko
<...>
vermagic:       5.6.0+ SMP mod_unload modversions

Out-of-tree module build:
➜  mlx5 make -C /images/leonro/src/kernel clean M=/tmp/mlx5
➜  mlx5 make -C /images/leonro/src/kernel M=/tmp/mlx5
➜  mlx5 modinfo /tmp/mlx5/mlx5_ib.ko
filename:       /tmp/mlx5/mlx5_ib.ko
<...>
vermagic:       5.6.0+ SMP mod_unload modversions

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200411155623.GA22175@zn.tnicReported-by: NBorislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Acked-by: NBorislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Acked-by: NJessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>
Co-developed-by: NMasahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NMasahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NLeon Romanovsky <leonro@mellanox.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      51161bfc
    • 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. 19 4月, 2020 16 次提交
    • F
      net: phy: broadcom: Add support for BCM53125 internal PHYs · 123aff2a
      由 Florian Fainelli 提交于 
      BCM53125 has internal Gigabit PHYs which support interrupts as well as
statistics, make it possible to configure both of those features with a
PHY driver entry.
Signed-off-by: NFlorian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      123aff2a
    • 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
      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