linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2][next] net: ethtool: Avoid thousands of -Wflex-array-member-not-at-end warnings

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: <7d227ced-0202-4f6e-9bc5-c2411d8224be@embeddedor.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 12:18:56 -0600
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
 Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>, Andrew Lunn
 <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 Potnuri Bharat Teja <bharat@...lsio.com>,
 Christian Benvenuti <benve@...co.com>, Satish Kharat <satishkh@...co.com>,
 Manish Chopra <manishc@...vell.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2][next] net: ethtool: Avoid thousands of
 -Wflex-array-member-not-at-end warnings



On 29/10/24 12:08, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 10:55:14 -0600 Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> On 29/10/24 07:58, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 13:02:27 -0600 Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>>>> @@ -3025,7 +3025,7 @@ static int bnxt_set_link_ksettings(struct net_device *dev,
>>>>    {
>>>>    	struct bnxt *bp = netdev_priv(dev);
>>>>    	struct bnxt_link_info *link_info = &bp->link_info;
>>>> -	const struct ethtool_link_settings *base = &lk_ksettings->base;
>>>> +	const struct ethtool_link_settings_hdr *base = &lk_ksettings->base;
>>>
>>> Please improve the variable ordering while at it. Longest list first,
>>> so move the @base definition first.
>>
>> OK. This would end up looking like:
>>
>> 	const struct ethtool_link_settings_hdr *base = &lk_ksettings->base;
>> 	struct bnxt *bp = netdev_priv(dev);
>> 	struct bnxt_link_info *link_info = &bp->link_info;
> 
> Correct, one step at a time.
> 
>>>> @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ static int linkmodes_reply_size(const struct ethnl_req_info *req_base,
>>>>    {
>>>>    	const struct linkmodes_reply_data *data = LINKMODES_REPDATA(reply_base);
>>>>    	const struct ethtool_link_ksettings *ksettings = &data->ksettings;
>>>> -	const struct ethtool_link_settings *lsettings = &ksettings->base;
>>>> +	const struct ethtool_link_settings_hdr *lsettings = &ksettings->base;
>>>
>>> here it was correct and now its not
>>
>> I don't think you want to change this. `lsettings` is based on `ksettings`. So,
>> `ksettings` should go first. The same scenario for the one below.
> 
> In which case you need to move the init out of line.

So, the same applies to the case below?

	const struct ethtool_link_settings_hdr *base = &lk_ksettings->base;
	struct bnxt *bp = netdev_priv(dev);
	struct bnxt_link_info *link_info = &bp->link_info;

Is this going to be a priority for any other netdev patches in the future?

--
Gustavo