6.7-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Nathan Lynch <nathanl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
commit 7a8e9cdf9405819105ae7405cd91e482bf574b01 upstream.
Using the address operator on the array doesn't work:
./include/linux/seq_buf.h:27:27: error: initialization of ‘char *’
from incompatible pointer type ‘char (*)[128]’
[-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types]
27 | .buffer = &__ ## NAME ## _buffer, \
| ^
Apart from fixing that, we can improve DECLARE_SEQ_BUF() by using a
compound literal to define the buffer array without attaching a name
to it. This makes the macro a single statement, allowing constructs
such as:
static DECLARE_SEQ_BUF(my_seq_buf, MYSB_SIZE);
to work as intended.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240116-declare-seq-buf-fix-v1-1-915db4692f32@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Fixes: dcc4e5728eea ("seq_buf: Introduce DECLARE_SEQ_BUF and seq_buf_str()")
Signed-off-by: Nathan Lynch <nathanl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
include/linux/seq_buf.h | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/include/linux/seq_buf.h
+++ b/include/linux/seq_buf.h
@@ -22,9 +22,8 @@ struct seq_buf {
};
#define DECLARE_SEQ_BUF(NAME, SIZE) \
- char __ ## NAME ## _buffer[SIZE] = ""; \
struct seq_buf NAME = { \
- .buffer = &__ ## NAME ## _buffer, \
+ .buffer = (char[SIZE]) { 0 }, \
.size = SIZE, \
}
