Re: [PATCH] treewide: Replace zero-length arrays with flexible-array member
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Date: 2020-02-13 11:09:21
Also in:
linux-crypto, lkml, netdev
Hi Gustavo, On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 10:49 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva [off-list ref] wrote:
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
unadvertenly introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
All these instances of code were found with the help of the following
Coccinelle script:
@@
identifier S, member, array;
type T1, T2;
@@
struct S {
...
T1 member;
T2 array[
- 0
];
};
I've stumbled across one more in include/uapi/linux/usb/ch9.h:
struct usb_key_descriptor {
__u8 bLength;
__u8 bDescriptorType;
__u8 tTKID[3];
__u8 bReserved;
__u8 bKeyData[0];
} __attribute__((packed));
And it seems people are (ab)using one-sized arrays for flexible arrays, too:
struct usb_string_descriptor {
__u8 bLength;
__u8 bDescriptorType;
__le16 wData[1]; /* UTF-16LE encoded */
} __attribute__ ((packed));
As this is UAPI, we have to be careful for regressions, though.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds