Am 20.05.20 um 00:55 schrieb Gustavo A. R. Silva:
The current codebase makes use of one-element arrays in the following
form:
struct something {
int length;
u8 data[1];
};
struct something *instance;
instance = kmalloc(sizeof(*instance) + size, GFP_KERNEL);
instance->length = size;
memcpy(instance->data, source, size);
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. So, replace
the one-element array with a flexible-array member.
Also, make use of the new struct_size() helper to properly calculate the
size of struct smu10_voltage_dependency_table.
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle and, audited and fixed
_manually_.
[1] https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgcc.gnu.org%2Fonlinedocs%2Fgcc%2FZero-Length.html&data=02%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7C8a400bdb88924a1d951508d7fc471966%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637255254622039268&sdata=ILOPPn17c%2B3oyLLdh%2BgH2b%2B8RdhWuTFGxruRD7GUHOo%3D&reserved=0
[2] https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FKSPP%2Flinux%2Fissues%2F21&data=02%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7C8a400bdb88924a1d951508d7fc471966%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637255254622039268&sdata=lCr5Otij55Snq27BDp4RmtW4hNhOS%2Bm4vSUOOAz07XA%3D&reserved=0
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@xxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx>
May I suggest that we add a section how to correctly do this to
Documentation/process/coding-style.rst or similar document?
I've seen a bunch of different approaches and some even doesn't work
with some gcc versions and result in a broken binary.
Thanks,
Christian.
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.c | 6 ++----
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.c
index 246bb9ac557d8..c9cfe90a29471 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.c
@@ -410,12 +410,10 @@ static int smu10_get_clock_voltage_dependency_table(struct pp_hwmgr *hwmgr,
struct smu10_voltage_dependency_table **pptable,
uint32_t num_entry, const DpmClock_t *pclk_dependency_table)
{
- uint32_t table_size, i;
+ uint32_t i;
struct smu10_voltage_dependency_table *ptable;
- table_size = sizeof(uint32_t) + sizeof(struct smu10_voltage_dependency_table) * num_entry;
- ptable = kzalloc(table_size, GFP_KERNEL);
-
+ ptable = kzalloc(struct_size(ptable, entries, num_entry), GFP_KERNEL);
if (NULL == ptable)
return -ENOMEM;
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.h
index 1fb296a996f3a..0f969de10fabc 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.h
@@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ struct smu10_clock_voltage_dependency_record {
struct smu10_voltage_dependency_table {
uint32_t count;
- struct smu10_clock_voltage_dependency_record entries[1];
+ struct smu10_clock_voltage_dependency_record entries[];
};
struct smu10_clock_voltage_information {
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx