Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 16 Mar 2018 20:12:15 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
        Ian Abbott <abbotti@mev.co.uk>,
        linux-input <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] Remove false-positive VLAs when using max()
Message-ID: <20180316201215.GG30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <1521174359-46392-1-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org>
 <ab2933a2-ca7b-eb3b-744d-bc037b1be688@redhat.com>
 <CA+55aFx92dXg-qnrjGS2Rsna6TE5HSPBgGpSA3cv4n_n3RqBzA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180316175502.GE30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <CA+55aFzsrVF7W+YQye=EeF4Wk3yDOTbb_vSiM8s1zkKbE4JV4Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFzsrVF7W+YQye=EeF4Wk3yDOTbb_vSiM8s1zkKbE4JV4Q@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 12:27:23PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> But it sure isn't "variable" either as far as the standard is
> concerned, because the standard doesn't even have that concept (it
> uses "variable" for argument numbers and for variables).

Huh?  6.7.5.2p4:

If the size is not present, the array type is an incomplete type.
If the size is * instead of being an expression, the array type is
a variable length array type of unspecified size, which can only be
used in declarations with function prototype scope [footnote]; such
arrays are nonetheless complete types.  If the size is an integer
constant expression and the element type has a known constant size,
the array type is not a variable length array type; otherwise, the
array type is a variable length array type.

footnote: Thus, * can be used only in function declarations that are
not definitions (see 6.7.5.3).

That's C99, straight from N1256.pdf (C99-TC3)...