linux-kernel - [PATCH v2] [next] pcmcia: synclink_cs: replace 1-element array with flex-array member

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: <Y5mQTOqFOGbJMerV@mail.google.com>
Date:   Wed, 14 Dec 2022 21:58:52 +1300
From:   Paulo Miguel Almeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@...il.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        Haowen Bai <baihaowen@...zu.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
        paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@...il.com
Subject: [PATCH v2] [next] pcmcia: synclink_cs: replace 1-element array with
 flex-array member

One-element arrays are deprecated, and we are replacing them with
flexible array members instead. So, replace one-element array with
flexible-array member in struct RXBUF. No changes were required
within the source code because of the existing padding in RXBUF struct

It's worth mentioning that doing a build before/after this patch
results in no binary output differences.

This helps with the ongoing efforts to tighten the FORTIFY_SOURCE
routines on memcpy() and help us make progress towards globally
enabling -fstrict-flex-arrays=3 [1].

Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/79
Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101836 [1]

Signed-off-by: Paulo Miguel Almeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@...il.com>
---
Changelog:

- v2: removed changes to how the size of RXBUF was calculated. I
  changed my mind after thinking about the existing padding in the
  struct. Happy to discuss it if anyone sees it differently.

- v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Y5mMWEtHWKOiPVU+@mail.google.com/
---
 drivers/char/pcmcia/synclink_cs.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/char/pcmcia/synclink_cs.c b/drivers/char/pcmcia/synclink_cs.c
index b2735be81ab2..0b03c6d13d59 100644
--- a/drivers/char/pcmcia/synclink_cs.c
+++ b/drivers/char/pcmcia/synclink_cs.c
@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ static MGSL_PARAMS default_params = {
 typedef struct {
 	int count;
 	unsigned char status;
-	char data[1];
+	char data[];
 } RXBUF;
 
 /* The queue of BH actions to be performed */
-- 
2.38.1