diff options
author | Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> | 2020-02-28 07:26:15 -0600 |
---|---|---|
committer | David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> | 2020-02-28 12:08:37 -0800 |
commit | 680a93166e80e43e3ff85be06005c5cfa492d852 (patch) | |
tree | 853ebe2b13270e4e82a448b4d56c98e86f05704b /net/l2tp | |
parent | 95e486f5519848ca4c2f2645cbe120de5df133f3 (diff) | |
download | linux-680a93166e80e43e3ff85be06005c5cfa492d852.tar.gz linux-680a93166e80e43e3ff85be06005c5cfa492d852.tar.bz2 linux-680a93166e80e43e3ff85be06005c5cfa492d852.zip |
net: mpls: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Diffstat (limited to 'net/l2tp')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions