"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <[email protected]> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:35:14PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 01:50:15PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> > There is a regular need in the kernel to provide a way to declare
>> > having a dynamically sized set of trailing elements in a structure.
>> > Kernel code should always use “flexible array members”[1] for these
>> > cases. The older style of one-element or zero-length arrays should
>> > no longer be used[2].
>> >
>> > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible_array_member
>> > [2]
>> > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v5.16/process/deprecated.html#zero-length-and-one-element-arrays
>> >
>> > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/78
>> > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Friendly ping: can someone take this, please?
>
> ...I can take this in my -next tree in the meantime.
Like we have discussed before, please don't take any wireless patches to
your tree. The conflicts just cause more work of us.
I assigned this patch to me on patchwork and I'm planning to take it to
wireless-next once it opens. Luca, ack?
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
On 3/28/22 00:47, Kalle Valo wrote:
> "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:35:14PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 01:50:15PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>>>> There is a regular need in the kernel to provide a way to declare
>>>> having a dynamically sized set of trailing elements in a structure.
>>>> Kernel code should always use “flexible array members”[1] for these
>>>> cases. The older style of one-element or zero-length arrays should
>>>> no longer be used[2].
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible_array_member
>>>> [2]
>>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v5.16/process/deprecated.html#zero-length-and-one-element-arrays
>>>>
>>>> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/78
>>>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Friendly ping: can someone take this, please?
>>
>> ...I can take this in my -next tree in the meantime.
>
> Like we have discussed before, please don't take any wireless patches to
> your tree. The conflicts just cause more work of us.
Sure thing. I just removed it from my tree.
I didn't get any reply from wireless people in more than a month, and
that's why I temporarily took it in my tree so it doesn't get lost. :)
> I assigned this patch to me on patchwork and I'm planning to take it to
> wireless-next once it opens. Luca, ack?
Awesome.
Thanks
--
Gustavo
On Mon, 2022-03-28 at 01:23 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>
> On 3/28/22 00:47, Kalle Valo wrote:
> > "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> > > On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:35:14PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 01:50:15PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > > > > There is a regular need in the kernel to provide a way to declare
> > > > > having a dynamically sized set of trailing elements in a structure.
> > > > > Kernel code should always use “flexible array members”[1] for these
> > > > > cases. The older style of one-element or zero-length arrays should
> > > > > no longer be used[2].
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible_array_member
> > > > > [2]
> > > > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v5.16/process/deprecated.html#zero-length-and-one-element-arrays
> > > > >
> > > > > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/78
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>
> > > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Friendly ping: can someone take this, please?
> > >
> > > ...I can take this in my -next tree in the meantime.
> >
> > Like we have discussed before, please don't take any wireless patches to
> > your tree. The conflicts just cause more work of us.
>
> Sure thing. I just removed it from my tree.
>
> I didn't get any reply from wireless people in more than a month, and
> that's why I temporarily took it in my tree so it doesn't get lost. :)
>
> > I assigned this patch to me on patchwork and I'm planning to take it to
> > wireless-next once it opens. Luca, ack?
Sorry for the delay, I was on vacation.
As you some of you already know, I'm stepping aside from my role as
iwlwifi maintainer (FWIW I'm moving to Intel Graphics). I can still
ack this change, but we'll soon send an update to MAINTAINERS to
reflect the change.
Acked-by: Luca Coelho <[email protected]>
--
Cheers,
Luca.
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <[email protected]> writes:
> On 3/28/22 00:47, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:35:14PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 01:50:15PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>>>>> There is a regular need in the kernel to provide a way to declare
>>>>> having a dynamically sized set of trailing elements in a structure.
>>>>> Kernel code should always use “flexible array members”[1] for these
>>>>> cases. The older style of one-element or zero-length arrays should
>>>>> no longer be used[2].
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible_array_member
>>>>> [2]
>>>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v5.16/process/deprecated.html#zero-length-and-one-element-arrays
>>>>>
>>>>> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/78
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Friendly ping: can someone take this, please?
>>>
>>> ...I can take this in my -next tree in the meantime.
>>
>> Like we have discussed before, please don't take any wireless patches to
>> your tree. The conflicts just cause more work of us.
>
> Sure thing. I just removed it from my tree.
>
> I didn't get any reply from wireless people in more than a month, and
> that's why I temporarily took it in my tree so it doesn't get lost. :)
That increases the risk of conflicts and, because of multiple trees we
have, the conflicts cause more work for us. Please don't take ANY
wireless patches to your tree (or any other tree for that matter) unless
Johannes or me has acked them.
If you don't get reply to your patch for few weeks (and the merge window
is not open), you can ping in the list or contact me.
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches