linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 13/15] scsi: sas: avoid gcc-10 zero-length-bounds warning

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAK8P3a1=5dmgB+k9B_jk2qBhBPnMSFMWrByP4jRvyvaJwBo94A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 1 May 2020 09:54:19 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...eleye.com>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.com>,
        linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/15] scsi: sas: avoid gcc-10 zero-length-bounds warning

On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 9:48 AM John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com> wrote:
> On 30/04/2020 22:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> > This should really be a flexible-array member, but the structure
> > already has such a member, swapping it out with sense_data[] would
> > cause many more warnings elsewhere.
> >
>
>
> Hi Arnd,
>
> If we really prefer flexible-array members over zero-length array
> members, then could we have a union of flexible-array members? I'm not
> sure if that's a good idea TBH (or even permitted), as these structures
> are defined by the SAS spec and good practice to keep as consistent as
> possible, but just wondering.

gcc does not allow flexible-array members inside of a union, or more than
one flexible-array member at the end of a structure.

I found one hack that would work, but I think it's too ugly and likely not
well-defined either:

struct ssp_response_iu {
...
        struct {
                u8      dummy[0]; /* a struct must have at least one
non-flexible member */
                u8      resp_data[]; /* allowed here because it's at
the one of a struct */
        };
        u8     sense_data[];
} __attribute__ ((packed));

> Apart from that:
>
> Reviewed-by: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>

Thanks!

     Arnd