[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <67dd9556e1305_14b140294a7@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2025 12:35:34 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/5] udp_tunnel: fix compile warning
Paolo Abeni wrote:
> Nathan reported that the compiler is not happy to use a zero
> size udp_tunnel_gro_types array:
>
> net/ipv4/udp_offload.c:130:8: warning: array index 0 is past the end of the array (that has type 'struct udp_tunnel_type_entry[0]') [-Warray-bounds]
> 130 | udp_tunnel_gro_types[0].gro_receive);
> | ^ ~
> include/linux/static_call.h:154:42: note: expanded from macro 'static_call_update'
> 154 | typeof(&STATIC_CALL_TRAMP(name)) __F = (func); \
> | ^~~~
> net/ipv4/udp_offload.c:47:1: note: array 'udp_tunnel_gro_types' declared here
> 47 | static struct udp_tunnel_type_entry udp_tunnel_gro_types[UDP_MAX_TUNNEL_TYPES];
> | ^
> 1 warning generated.
>
> In such (unusual) configuration we should skip entirely the
> static call optimization accounting.
>
> Reported-by: syzbot+8c469a2260132cd095c1@...kaller.appspotmail.com
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/cover.1741718157.git.pabeni@redhat.com/T/#m6e309a49f04330de81a618c3c166368252ba42e4
> Fixes: 311b36574ceac ("udp_tunnel: use static call for GRO hooks when possible")
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Should CONFIG_NET_UDP_TUNNEL just not be user selectable and only
enabled by implementations of UDP tunnels like vxlan and geneve?
> ---
> net/ipv4/udp_offload.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c b/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
> index 02365b818f1af..fd2b8e3830beb 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
> @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ void udp_tunnel_update_gro_rcv(struct sock *sk, bool add)
> struct udp_sock *up = udp_sk(sk);
> int i, old_gro_type_nr;
>
> - if (!up->gro_receive)
> + if (!UDP_MAX_TUNNEL_TYPES || !up->gro_receive)
> return;
If that is too risky, I suppose this workaround is sufficient.
But having a zero length array seems a bit odd.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists