On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 10:50:19AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 01:15:43PM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 08:08:15PM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 07:03:21PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 06:50:55PM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 01:54:49PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 03:48:45PM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > struct hfa384x_pdr_refdac_measurements {
> > > > > > > - u16 value[0];
> > > > > > > + DECLARE_FLEX_ARRAY(u16, value);
> > > > > > > } __packed;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why? This structure is never used anywhere, right? So why is this
> > > > > > needed to be changed and not just removed entirely? Same for the other
> > > > > > structures in this patch.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello Greg,
> > > > > I am unable to confirm that these structures are truly not needed in the absence
> > > > > if a real device based testing. I could only validate that using the compile
> > > > > build and driver loading.
> > > >
> > > > Think this through, if no one is actually using this structure, and it
> > > > is of 0 size, then do you think it is being used?
> > >
> > > Hello Greg,
> > > I did not find any memory allocation for these zero length array structures.
> > > Also, the union or its enclosing structure do not appear to access the members.
> > > Hence I am leaning towards concluding that these zero length array structures do
> > > not appear to be necessary.
> > >
> > > There are a few other structures that are part of the same union, however, they
> > > too do not appear to be used for accessing the memory assigned to the union [or
> > > its enclosing structure]. I think most of the members of these unions can be
> > > replaced by one max size structure of this union [e.g. struct
> > > hfa384x_pdr_mkk_measurements].
> > >
> > > Could you please comment if I am reading the code right?
> > >
> > > For your quick reference, the zero length structure declaration are online 963
> > > whereas the union is on line number 1080 of the file drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> >
> > Hello Greg,
> > can you please suggest how should I approach this clean-up/correction?
> >
>
> Like this:
Thank you Dan. This takes me back to the very first version of this patch. I
will send in the clean up.
./drv
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> index 0611e37df6ac..6a3df58c9e9c 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> @@ -959,10 +959,6 @@ struct hfa384x_pdr_nicid {
> u16 minor;
> } __packed;
>
> -struct hfa384x_pdr_refdac_measurements {
> - u16 value[0];
> -} __packed;
> -
> struct hfa384x_pdr_vgdac_measurements {
> u16 value[0];
> } __packed;
> @@ -1077,7 +1073,6 @@ 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;
>
