On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 12:46 AM Gustavo A. R. Silva
<gustavoars@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 12:25:13PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 12:22 AM Gustavo A. R. Silva
> > <gustavoars@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > 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.
> >
> > However, the ACPICA code in the kernel comes from an external project
> > and changes of this type are generally not applicable to it unless
> > accepted upstream.
>
> Hi Rafael,
>
> By _accepted upstream_, in this case, you mean the adoption of the
> flexible-arrays in the whole codebase, first?
I meant whether or not the patch is accepted by the ACPICA upstream.
> If this is the case
> notice that there are hundreds of these flexible-array conversions
> in mainline, already:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/log/?qt=grep&q=flexible-array
>
> Is this what you mean?
I'm not actually sure what you mean here.
