linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ibft: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20200521183235.GA29907@embeddedor>
Date:   Thu, 21 May 2020 13:32:35 -0500
From:   "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>
To:     Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>,
        Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ibft: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array

Hi all,

Friendly ping: who can take this?

Thanks
--
Gustavo

On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 01:55:44PM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva 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
> 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]
> 
> sizeof(flexible-array-member) triggers a warning because flexible array
> members have incomplete type[1]. There are some instances of code in
> which the sizeof operator is being incorrectly/erroneously applied to
> zero-length arrays and the result is zero. Such instances may be hiding
> some bugs. So, this work (flexible-array member conversions) will also
> help to get completely rid of those sorts of issues.
> 
> 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")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@...nel.org>
> ---
>  drivers/firmware/iscsi_ibft.c |    2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/iscsi_ibft.c b/drivers/firmware/iscsi_ibft.c
> index 96758b71a8db..7127a04bca19 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/iscsi_ibft.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/iscsi_ibft.c
> @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ struct ibft_control {
>  	u16 tgt0_off;
>  	u16 nic1_off;
>  	u16 tgt1_off;
> -	u16 expansion[0];
> +	u16 expansion[];
>  } __attribute__((__packed__));
>  
>  struct ibft_initiator {
>