include/uapi/linux/netfilter_bridge/ebtables.h | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
From: "GONG, Ruiqi" <gongruiqi1@huawei.com>
As suggested by Kees[1], replace the old-style 0-element array members
of multiple structs in ebtables.h with modern C99 flexible array.
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/5E8E0F9C-EE3F-4B0D-B827-DC47397E2A4A@kernel.org/
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
Signed-off-by: GONG, Ruiqi <gongruiqi1@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
---
v2: designate to net-next; cc more netdev maintainers
include/uapi/linux/netfilter_bridge/ebtables.h | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/netfilter_bridge/ebtables.h b/include/uapi/linux/netfilter_bridge/ebtables.h
index b0caad82b693..673b00df162c 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/netfilter_bridge/ebtables.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/netfilter_bridge/ebtables.h
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ struct ebt_entries {
/* nr. of entries */
unsigned int nentries;
/* entry list */
- char data[0] __attribute__ ((aligned (__alignof__(struct ebt_replace))));
+ char data[] __attribute__ ((aligned (__alignof__(struct ebt_replace))));
};
/* used for the bitmask of struct ebt_entry */
@@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ struct ebt_entry_match {
} u;
/* size of data */
unsigned int match_size;
- unsigned char data[0] __attribute__ ((aligned (__alignof__(struct ebt_replace))));
+ unsigned char data[] __attribute__ ((aligned (__alignof__(struct ebt_replace))));
};
struct ebt_entry_watcher {
@@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ struct ebt_entry_watcher {
} u;
/* size of data */
unsigned int watcher_size;
- unsigned char data[0] __attribute__ ((aligned (__alignof__(struct ebt_replace))));
+ unsigned char data[] __attribute__ ((aligned (__alignof__(struct ebt_replace))));
};
struct ebt_entry_target {
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ struct ebt_entry_target {
} u;
/* size of data */
unsigned int target_size;
- unsigned char data[0] __attribute__ ((aligned (__alignof__(struct ebt_replace))));
+ unsigned char data[] __attribute__ ((aligned (__alignof__(struct ebt_replace))));
};
#define EBT_STANDARD_TARGET "standard"
@@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ struct ebt_entry {
/* sizeof ebt_entry + matches + watchers + target */
unsigned int next_offset;
);
- unsigned char elems[0] __attribute__ ((aligned (__alignof__(struct ebt_replace))));
+ unsigned char elems[] __attribute__ ((aligned (__alignof__(struct ebt_replace))));
};
static __inline__ struct ebt_entry_target *
--
2.41.0
On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 05:34:43PM +0800, GONG, Ruiqi wrote: > From: "GONG, Ruiqi" <gongruiqi1@huawei.com> > > As suggested by Kees[1], replace the old-style 0-element array members > of multiple structs in ebtables.h with modern C99 flexible array. > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/5E8E0F9C-EE3F-4B0D-B827-DC47397E2A4A@kernel.org/ > > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21 > Signed-off-by: GONG, Ruiqi <gongruiqi1@huawei.com> > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> > --- > > v2: designate to net-next; cc more netdev maintainers It's slightly unclear to me if this should be targeting net-next or nf-next. But regardless, it doesn't seem to apply cleanly to the main branch of either tree. Please consider resolving that and posting again, being sure to allow 24h before postings. Link: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html -- pw-bot: changes-requested
On 2023/08/16 19:16, Simon Horman wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 05:34:43PM +0800, GONG, Ruiqi wrote: >> From: "GONG, Ruiqi" <gongruiqi1@huawei.com> >> >> As suggested by Kees[1], replace the old-style 0-element array members >> of multiple structs in ebtables.h with modern C99 flexible array. >> >> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/5E8E0F9C-EE3F-4B0D-B827-DC47397E2A4A@kernel.org/ >> >> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21 >> Signed-off-by: GONG, Ruiqi <gongruiqi1@huawei.com> >> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> >> --- >> >> v2: designate to net-next; cc more netdev maintainers > > It's slightly unclear to me if this should be targeting > net-next or nf-next. But regardless, it doesn't seem > to apply cleanly to the main branch of either tree. I find out that it's because this patch depends on a previous patch I've just sent: [v4] netfilter: ebtables: fix fortify warnings in size_entry_mwt() Maybe I should make them two into a patch set? Otherwise if I adapt this patch to net-next, it won't be applied either if the above patch is applied ... > > Please consider resolving that and posting again, > being sure to allow 24h before postings. > > Link: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html >
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.