On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:09:16PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Mon, 2020-05-18 at 14:01 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > > The current codebase makes use of one-element arrays in the following > > form: > > > > struct something { > > int length; > > u8 data[1]; > > }; > [] > > This issue has been out there since 2009. > > This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle and fixed _manually_. > [] > > diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_time.c b/arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_time.c > > index 7af31b245636..993a8ae6fdfb 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_time.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_time.c > > @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ struct uv_rtc_timer_head { > > struct { > > int lcpu; /* systemwide logical cpu number */ > > u64 expires; /* next timer expiration for this cpu */ > > - } cpu[1]; > > + } cpu[]; > > }; > > > > /* > > @@ -156,9 +156,8 @@ static __init int uv_rtc_allocate_timers(void) > > struct uv_rtc_timer_head *head = blade_info[bid]; > > > > if (!head) { > > - head = kmalloc_node(sizeof(struct uv_rtc_timer_head) + > > - (uv_blade_nr_possible_cpus(bid) * > > - 2 * sizeof(u64)), > > + head = kmalloc_node(struct_size(head, cpu, > > + uv_blade_nr_possible_cpus(bid)), > > It's probably safer to use kzalloc_node here as well. > Thanks for your feedback, Joe. I'll wait for comments from the maintainers on this and the rest of the patch. Thanks -- Gustavo > > GFP_KERNEL, nid); > > if (!head) { > > uv_rtc_deallocate_timers(); >