[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20230522212949.never.283-kees@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2023 14:29:53 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] lkdtm/bugs: Switch from 1-element array to flexible array
The testing for ARRAY_BOUNDS just wants an uninstrumented array,
and the proper flexible array definition is fine for that.
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
---
drivers/misc/lkdtm/bugs.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/misc/lkdtm/bugs.c b/drivers/misc/lkdtm/bugs.c
index 48821f4c2b21..224f42cdddf2 100644
--- a/drivers/misc/lkdtm/bugs.c
+++ b/drivers/misc/lkdtm/bugs.c
@@ -305,11 +305,10 @@ static void lkdtm_OVERFLOW_UNSIGNED(void)
ignored = value;
}
-/* Intentionally using old-style flex array definition of 1 byte. */
struct array_bounds_flex_array {
int one;
int two;
- char data[1];
+ char data[];
};
struct array_bounds {
--
2.34.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists