On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 09:15:10PM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 04:34:15PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 08:42:59PM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > First, my apologies for the long email.
> > > I am requesting guidance on how to approach resolving the zero element flexible
> > > VLO struct implementation in this driver in file drivers/staging/waln-ng/hfa384x.f
> > >
> > > The struct hfa384x_pdrec contains nested structs with zero element arrays. These
> > > zero element structs are part of a union 'data' inside the struct container. This
> > > union 'data' is the last element of this container. Please see the code snip below:
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > 1068 struct hfa384x_pdrec {
> > > 1 __le16 len; /* in words */
> > > 2 __le16 code;
> > > 3 union pdr {
> > > 4 struct hfa384x_pdr_pcb_partnum pcb_partnum;
> > > 11 struct hfa384x_pdr_nicid nicid;
> > > 12 struct hfa384x_pdr_refdac_measurements refdac_measurements;
> > > 13 struct hfa384x_pdr_vgdac_measurements vgdac_measurements;
> > > 14 struct hfa384x_pdr_level_comp_measurements level_compc_measurements;
> > > 15 struct hfa384x_pdr_mac_address mac_address;
> > > 39 } data;
> > > 40 } __packed;
> > >
> > > </snip>
> > >
> > > The three structures in question are declared as follows in the same file:
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > > 962 struct hfa384x_pdr_refdac_measurements {
> > > 1 u16 value[0];
> > > 2 } __packed;
> > > 3
> > > 4 struct hfa384x_pdr_vgdac_measurements {
> > > 5 u16 value[0];
> > > 6 } __packed;
> > > 7
> > > 8 struct hfa384x_pdr_level_comp_measurements {
> > > 9 u16 value[0];
> > > 10 } __packed;
> > > </snip>
> > >
> > > As per the C99 specifications, the flexible array struct should have at least
> > > one member other than the true flexible array member. So converting these from
> > > [0] to [] is not feasible in the current form.
> > >
> > > I did not find these struct variables being used for memory allocation in the
> > > code directly. My find may be short since the implementation appears to get very
> > > complex as I tried to get deeper.
> > >
> > > Can you please suggest how should I approach correcting the zero element flex
> > > array implementation here? Can these structs be removed if they are unused?
> >
> > Are you sure they are unused?
> >
> > They look like structures that are read from the memory of a device,
> > right? Try removing the structures from the union and see what happens
> > :)
>
> I did remove the structs from the union and it built fine. Is there anything else I
> can check/test to verify the impact?
>
> <snip>
> drv@qemulion:~/git/kernels/staging$ git diff
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> index 0611e37df6ac..8fe10aa93dfb 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> @@ -1077,9 +1077,6 @@ struct hfa384x_pdrec {
> struct hfa384x_pdr_mfisuprange mfisuprange;
> struct hfa384x_pdr_cfisuprange cfisuprange;
> struct hfa384x_pdr_nicid nicid;
> - struct hfa384x_pdr_refdac_measurements refdac_measurements;
> - struct hfa384x_pdr_vgdac_measurements vgdac_measurements;
> - struct hfa384x_pdr_level_comp_measurements level_compc_measurements;
> struct hfa384x_pdr_mac_address mac_address;
> struct hfa384x_pdr_mkk_callname mkk_callname;
> struct hfa384x_pdr_regdomain regdomain;
> drv@qemulion:~/git/kernels/staging$ make M=drivers/staging/wlan-ng/
> CC [M] drivers/staging/wlan-ng/prism2usb.o
> CC [M] drivers/staging/wlan-ng/p80211netdev.o
> LD [M] drivers/staging/wlan-ng/prism2_usb.o
> MODPOST drivers/staging/wlan-ng/Module.symvers
> LD [M] drivers/staging/wlan-ng/prism2_usb.ko
> BTF [M] drivers/staging/wlan-ng/prism2_usb.ko
> drv@qemulion:~/git/kernels/staging$
> </snip>
>
Test the device to make sure it still works?
