Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1610703513-933-1-git-send-email-abaci-bugfix@linux.alibaba.com>
In-Reply-To: <1610703513-933-1-git-send-email-abaci-bugfix@linux.alibaba.com>
From:   Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Date:   Tue, 19 Jan 2021 11:11:27 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+ASDXPCcgfXQNGRQThKHSRcxZ7i6=1GM0+sZL+ZAid8e=+sRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] marvell/mwifiex: replace one-element array with
 flexible-array member.
To:     Jiapeng Zhong <abaci-bugfix@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     amit karwar <amitkarwar@gmail.com>,
        Ganapathi Bhat <ganapathi.bhat@nxp.com>,
        Xinming Hu <huxinming820@gmail.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 1:39 AM Jiapeng Zhong
<abaci-bugfix@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>
> Fix the follow coccicheck warnings:
>
> ./drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/fw.h: WARNING use flexible-array
> member instead(https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/
> deprecated.html#zero-length-and-one-element-arrays)
>
> Reported-by: Abaci Robot <abaci@linux.alibaba.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jiapeng Zhong <abaci-bugfix@linux.alibaba.com>

Past experience unfortunately requires me to ask: did you test your
changes? I understand that's a mostly legit warning, and a good
deprecation notice, but that doesn't mean this is the right fix. One
probably should instead audit the usage sites to see if they *are*
already making proper sizeof (or other) comparisons, and if not, fix
those first. And if any sites *are* doing correct sizeof computations
using the existing struct layouts, then you are probably breaking
them.

Or if you have audited the usage of these structs, it's nice to make a
small explanation of why this is correct, so I (and other readers)
don't have to ask these questions :)

Regards,
Brian