Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.37 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.37;
Message-ID: <4b10068c-4285-41df-b4bb-4c61ac70a30b@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 Nov 2023 02:01:25 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH][next] nouveau/gsp: replace zero-length array
 with flex-array member and use __counted_by
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Timur Tabi <ttabi@nvidia.com>,
        "gustavoars@kernel.org" <gustavoars@kernel.org>
Cc:     "nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org" <nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        "daniel@ffwll.ch" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        "dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <ZVZbX7C5suLMiBf+@work> <ZVZxXiXYIzEwUE3N@pollux>
 <6517a6a41eb72d16596c913dc56467e0390287a3.camel@nvidia.com>
From:   Danilo Krummrich <dakr@redhat.com>
Organization: RedHat
In-Reply-To: <6517a6a41eb72d16596c913dc56467e0390287a3.camel@nvidia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 11/16/23 20:55, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-11-16 at 20:45 +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>> As I already mentioned for Timur's patch [2], I'd prefer to get a fix
>> upstream
>> (meaning [1] in this case). Of course, that's probably more up to Timur to
>> tell
>> if this will work out.
> 
> Don't count on it.

I see. Well, I think it's fine. Once we implement a decent abstraction we likely
don't need those header files in the kernel anymore.

@Gustavo, if you agree I will discard the indentation change when applying the
patch to keep the diff as small as possible.

- Danilo

> 
> Even if I did change [0] to [], I'm not going to be able to add the
> "__counted_by(numEntries);" because that's just not something that our build
> system uses.
> 
> And even then, I would need to change all [0] to [].
> 
> You're not going to be able to use RM's header files as-is anyway in the
> long term.  If we changed the layout of PACKED_REGISTRY_TABLE, we're not
> going to create a PACKED_REGISTRY_TABLE2 and keep both around.  We're just
> going to change PACKED_REGISTRY_TABLE and pretend the previous version never
> existed.  You will then have to manually copy the new struct to your header
> files and and maintain two versions yourself.
> 
> 
>