mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Cc: Jes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@gmail.com>,
	Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
	Ulrich Kunitz <kune@deine-taler.de>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] zd1211rw/zd_usb.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 18:46:45 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h7yfauiy.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <948ec681-c4ee-3479-8d8b-5aa1e358ec04@embeddedor.com> (Gustavo A. R. Silva's message of "Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:36:39 -0500")

"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com> writes:

> On 3/10/20 5:34 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> On 3/10/20 6:31 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/10/20 5:20 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>>>> On 3/10/20 6:13 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/10/20 5:07 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>>>>>> As I stated in my previous answer, this seems more code churn than an
>>>>>> actual fix. If this is a real problem, shouldn't the work be put into
>>>>>> fixing the compiler to handle foo[0] instead? It seems that is where the
>>>>>> real value would be.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah. But, unfortunately, I'm not a compiler guy, so I'm not able to fix the
>>>>> compiler as you suggest. And I honestly don't see what is so annoying/disturbing
>>>>> about applying a patch that removes the 0 from foo[0] when it brings benefit
>>>>> to the whole codebase.
>>>>
>>>> My point is that it adds what seems like unnecessary churn, which is not
>>>> a benefit, and it doesn't improve the generated code.
>>>>
>>>
>>> As an example of one of the benefits of this is that the compiler won't trigger
>>> a warning in the following case:
>>>
>>> struct boo {
>>> 	int stuff;
>>> 	struct foo array[0];
>>> 	int morestuff;
>>> };
>>>
>>> The result of the code above is an undefined behavior.
>>>
>>> On the other hand in the case below, the compiles does trigger a warning:
>>>
>>> struct boo {
>>> 	int stuff;
>>> 	struct foo array[];
>>> 	int morestuff;
>>> };
>> 
>> Right, this just underlines my prior argument, that this should be fixed
>> in the compiler.
>> 
>
> In the meantime it's not at all harmful to do something about it in the codebase.

Cleanup patches are not always harmful, at least they can create bugs
and conflicts. But I think in this case there are clear benefits for the
churn so I'm going to apply these.

Sorry Jes :)

-- 
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches

  reply	other threads:[~2020-03-23 16:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-05 11:12 Gustavo A. R. Silva
2020-03-05 14:50 ` Kalle Valo
2020-03-05 15:20   ` Joe Perches
2020-03-05 16:10     ` Kalle Valo
2020-03-05 18:28       ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2020-03-10 13:56         ` Kalle Valo
2020-03-10 21:52           ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2020-03-10 22:07             ` Jes Sorensen
2020-03-10 22:13               ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2020-03-10 22:15                 ` Joe Perches
2020-03-10 22:21                   ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2020-03-10 22:28                     ` Joe Perches
2020-03-10 22:33                       ` Jes Sorensen
2020-03-10 22:41                         ` Joe Perches
2020-03-10 22:46                           ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2020-03-10 22:33                       ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2020-03-10 22:20                 ` Jes Sorensen
2020-03-10 22:31                   ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2020-03-10 22:34                     ` Jes Sorensen
2020-03-10 22:36                       ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2020-03-23 16:46                         ` Kalle Valo [this message]
2020-03-23 17:14 ` [PATCH][next] zd1211rw: " Kalle Valo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87h7yfauiy.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com \
    --to=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=gustavo@embeddedor.com \
    --cc=jes.sorensen@gmail.com \
    --cc=joe@perches.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kune@deine-taler.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome