Skip to contentSkip to conversation

rsxx: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member

PATCH In review Gustavo A. R. Silva 2 participants 4 messages Feb 12, 2020 – Mar 19, 2020 Block layer

lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 rsxx: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member

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 inadvertenly introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

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

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

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

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

---
 drivers/block/rsxx/dma.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
drivers/block/rsxx/dma.c +1 -1
index 111eb659e66d..1914f5488b22 100644
@@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ struct dma_tracker {
 struct dma_tracker_list {
 	spinlock_t		lock;
 	int			head;
-	struct dma_tracker	list[0];
+	struct dma_tracker	list[];
 };
 
 
Signature · 1 line
2.25.0
#1 lore raw

Hi all,

Friendly ping: Who can take this?

Thanks
--
Gustavo

Quoted 47 lines · Gustavo A. R. Silva

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

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

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

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

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

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

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

---
 drivers/block/rsxx/dma.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
drivers/block/rsxx/dma.c +1 -1
index 111eb659e66d..1914f5488b22 100644
@@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ struct dma_tracker {
 struct dma_tracker_list {
 	spinlock_t		lock;
 	int			head;
-	struct dma_tracker	list[0];
+	struct dma_tracker	list[];
 };
 
 
maintainer
#2 lore raw
In reply to Gustavo A. R. Silva
Quoted 22 lines · Gustavo A. R. Silva

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

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

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being inadvertenly 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]

Quoted 5 lines

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

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

Applied for 5.7, thanks.

Signature · 1 line
Jens Axboe