On Sun, Jun 09, 2024 at 09:20:56PM +0300, michael.nemanov@xxxxxx wrote:
> From: Michael Nemanov <Michael.Nemanov@xxxxxx>
>
> High-level init code for new vifs
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/ti/cc33xx/init.c | 236 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/net/wireless/ti/cc33xx/init.h | 15 ++
> 2 files changed, 251 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 drivers/net/wireless/ti/cc33xx/init.c
> create mode 100644 drivers/net/wireless/ti/cc33xx/init.h
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ti/cc33xx/init.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ti/cc33xx/init.c
...
> +int cc33xx_init_vif_specific(struct cc33xx *cc, struct ieee80211_vif *vif)
> +{
> + struct cc33xx_vif *wlvif = cc33xx_vif_to_data(vif);
> + struct conf_tx_ac_category *conf_ac;
> + struct conf_tx_ac_category ac_conf[4];
> + struct conf_tx_tid tid_conf[8];
> + struct conf_tx_settings *tx_settings = &cc->conf.host_conf.tx;
> + struct conf_tx_ac_category *p_wl_host_ac_conf = &tx_settings->ac_conf0;
> + struct conf_tx_tid *p_wl_host_tid_conf = &tx_settings->tid_conf0;
> + bool is_ap = (wlvif->bss_type == BSS_TYPE_AP_BSS);
> + u8 ps_scheme = cc->conf.mac.ps_scheme;
> + int ret, i;
...
> + /* Default TID/AC configuration */
> + WARN_ON(tx_settings->tid_conf_count != tx_settings->ac_conf_count);
> + memcpy(ac_conf, p_wl_host_ac_conf, 4 * sizeof(struct conf_tx_ac_category));
> + memcpy(tid_conf, p_wl_host_tid_conf, 8 * sizeof(struct conf_tx_tid));
Hi Michael,
allmodconfig builds on x86_64 with gcc-13 flag the following:
In file included from ./include/linux/string.h:374,
from ./include/linux/bitmap.h:13,
from ./include/linux/cpumask.h:13,
from ./arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h:21,
from ./arch/x86/include/asm/irqflags.h:60,
from ./include/linux/irqflags.h:18,
from ./include/linux/spinlock.h:59,
from ./include/linux/mmzone.h:8,
from ./include/linux/gfp.h:7,
from ./include/linux/firmware.h:8,
from drivers/net/wireless/ti/cc33xx/init.c:6:
In function 'fortify_memcpy_chk',
inlined from 'cc33xx_init_vif_specific' at drivers/net/wireless/ti/cc33xx/init.c:156:2:
./include/linux/fortify-string.h:580:25: warning: call to '__read_overflow2_field' declared with attribute warning: detected read beyond size of field (2nd parameter); maybe use struct_group()? [-Wattribute-warning]
580 | __read_overflow2_field(q_size_field, size);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In function 'fortify_memcpy_chk',
inlined from 'cc33xx_init_vif_specific' at drivers/net/wireless/ti/cc33xx/init.c:157:2:
./include/linux/fortify-string.h:580:25: warning: call to '__read_overflow2_field' declared with attribute warning: detected read beyond size of field (2nd parameter); maybe use struct_group()? [-Wattribute-warning]
580 | __read_overflow2_field(q_size_field, size);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CC [M] drivers/net/wireless/ti/cc33xx/rx.o
I believe that this is because the destination for each of the two memcpy()
calls immediately above is too narrow - 1 structure wide instead of 4 or 8.
I think this can be resolved by either using:
1. struct_group in .../cc33xx/conf.h:struct conf_tx_settings
to wrap ac_conf0 ... ac_conf3, and separately tid_conf0 ... tid_conf7.
2. Using arrays for ac_conf and tid_conf in
.../cc33xx/conf.h:struct conf_tx_settings, in which case perhaps
.../wlcore/conf.h:struct conf_tx_settings can be reused somehow
(I did not check closely)?
Similar errors are flagged elsewhere in this series.
Please take a look at allmodconfig builds and make sure
no warnings are introduced.
Lastly, more related to the series as a whole than this patch in
particular, please consider running checkpatch.pl --codespell
Thanks!
...
