From linux-wireless  Thu Aug 26 05:24:18 2021
From: Keith Packard <keithp () keithp ! com>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 05:24:18 +0000
To: linux-wireless
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] treewide: Replace 0-element memcpy() destinations with flexible arrays
Message-Id: <87r1egpym5.fsf () keithp ! com>
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=162995595802479
MIME-Version: 1
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--=-=-="

--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> writes:

> In some cases, use of the flex_array() helper is needed when a flexible
> array is part of a union.

The code below seems to show that the helper is also needed when the
flexible array is the only member of a struct? Or is this just an
extension of the 'part of a union' clause?

> @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ struct bmi_cmd {
>=20=20
>  union bmi_resp {
>  	struct {
> -		u8 payload[0];
> +		DECLARE_FLEX_ARRAY(u8, payload);
>  	} read_mem;
>  	struct {
>  		__le32 result;

=2D-=20
=2Dkeith

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=cojg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--