Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 28 Oct 2022 09:36:19 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To:     Christian =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=F6nig?= <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Cc:     Paulo Miguel Almeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@gmail.com>,
        Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
        "Pan, Xinhui" <Xinhui.Pan@amd.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
        Grigory Vasilyev <h0tc0d3@gmail.com>,
        Claudio Suarez <cssk@net-c.es>,
        Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@163.com>,
        Rongguang Wei <weirongguang@kylinos.cn>,
        amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [next] drm/amdgpu: Replace one-element array with
 flexible-array member
Message-ID: <202210280855.9DF8E4D72@keescook>
References: <Y1tkWdwPUp+UdpM0@mail.google.com>
 <04e37ee1-53b0-97ab-d6d7-a39edfbdc2ea@amd.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <04e37ee1-53b0-97ab-d6d7-a39edfbdc2ea@amd.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 09:18:39AM +0200, Christian K?nig wrote:
> Am 28.10.22 um 07:10 schrieb Paulo Miguel Almeida:
> > One-element arrays are deprecated, and we are replacing them with
> > flexible array members instead. So, replace one-element array with
> > flexible-array member in struct _ATOM_FAKE_EDID_PATCH_RECORD and
> > refactor the rest of the code accordingly.
> > 
> > This helps with the ongoing efforts to tighten the FORTIFY_SOURCE
> > routines on memcpy() and help us make progress towards globally
> > enabling -fstrict-flex-arrays=3 [1].
> > 
> > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/79
> > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/238
> > Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101836 [1]
> 
> I'm not sure if that's a good idea. We had multiple attempts to refactor
> this now and it always caused a regression.
> 
> Additional to that the header in question came from our BIOS team and isn't
> following Linux styles in general.
> 
> Alex what do you think?

Fake flexible arrays (i.e. 1-element arrays) are deprecated in Linux[1]
(and, frankly, deprecated in C since 1999 and even well before then given
the 0-sized extension that was added in GCC), so we can't continue to
bring them into kernel sources. Their use breaks both compile-time and
run-time bounds checking efforts, etc.

All that said, converting away from them can be tricky, and I think such
conversions need to explicitly show how they were checked for binary
differences[2].

Paulo, can you please check for deltas and report your findings in the
commit log? Note that add struct_size() use in the same patch may result
in binary differences, so for more complex cases, you may want to split
the 1-element conversion from the struct_size() conversions.

-Kees

[1] https://docs.kernel.org/process/deprecated.html#zero-length-and-one-element-arrays
[2] https://outflux.net/blog/archives/2022/06/24/finding-binary-differences/

-- 
Kees Cook