On 5/23/23 20:21, Ping-Ke Shih wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2023 10:13 AM To: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-hardening@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [PATCH][next] wifi: rtw89: coex: Fix __write_overflow_field error One-element arrays as fake flexible arrays are deprecated, and we are moving towards adopting C99 flexible-array members instead. Fix the following error seen under GCC-13 and -fstrict-flex-arrays=3: In function ‘fortify_memcpy_chk’, inlined from ‘_append_tdma’ at drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c:1579:3: include/linux/fortify-string.h:583:25: error: call to ‘__write_overflow_field’ declared with attribute warning: detected write beyond size of field (1st parameter); maybe use struct_group()? [-Werror=attribute-warning] 583 | __write_overflow_field(p_size_field, size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This helps with the ongoing efforts to tighten the FORTIFY_SOURCE routines on memcpy() and help us make progress towards globally enabling -fstrict-flex-arrays=3 [1]. This results in no differences in binary output. Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21 Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/299 Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-October/602902.html [1] Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@xxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c index 3a586a971e8f..bda0e1e99a8c 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ static const struct rtw89_btc_ver rtw89_btc_ver_defs[] = { struct rtw89_btc_btf_tlv { u8 type; u8 len; - u8 val[1]; + u8 val[]; } __packed; enum btc_btf_set_report_en {Arnd has sent the same patch [1] as yours.
Oh that's great! What a coincidence. :) Thanks for letting me know. -- Gustavo
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/27a7010de8be4006a3e4b95e851781c6@xxxxxxxxxxx/T/#mca619c8261b87b88eedd391ceafb34c40d513ce5
