| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Make do_splice(), so other kernel parts can reuse it
Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
dmar_drhd_units is traversed using list_for_each_entry_rcu()
outside of an RCU read side critical section but under the
protection of dmar_global_lock. Hence add corresponding lockdep
expression to silence the following false-positive warnings:
[ 1.603975] =============================
[ 1.603976] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
[ 1.603977] 5.5.4-stable #17 Not tainted
[ 1.603978] -----------------------------
[ 1.603980] drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c:4769 RCU-list traversed in non-reader section!!
[ 1.603869] =============================
[ 1.603870] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
[ 1.603872] 5.5.4-stable #17 Not tainted
[ 1.603874] -----------------------------
[ 1.603875] drivers/iommu/dmar.c:293 RCU-list traversed in non-reader section!!
Tested-by: Madhuparna Bhowmik <madhuparnabhowmik10@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Amol Grover <frextrite@gmail.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Acked-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200221160005.GA13552@embeddedor
|
|
Replace with appropriate types.h.
Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200204162114.28937-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
|
|
<oleksandr.suvorov@toradex.com>:
- fix the values source for the xfer debug message.
- fix the "max speed setting" message showing.
Oleksandr Suvorov (2):
spi: spidev: fix a debug message value
spi: spidev: fix speed setting message
drivers/spi/spidev.c | 23 ++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
--
2.24.1
|
|
Explicitly document that the driver-specific buffer structure
must start with the subsystem-specific struct (vb2_v4l2_buffer
in the case of V4L2).
Signed-off-by: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@xs4all.nl>
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
|
|
Commit ee63cfa7fc19 ("block: add kblockd_schedule_work_on()")
introduced the helper in 2016. Remove it because since then no caller
was added.
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
|
|
Adds core id to sof_ipc_comp. The intention of this change
is to inform FW on which core that particular component
should run. Right now core id is only passed when pipeline
is created, which is not flexible enough and doesn't allow
for FW to handle this the right way.
Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomasz Lauda <tomasz.lauda@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200228231850.9226-5-pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
|
|
Currently, v4l2_pipeline_pm_use() prototype is:
int v4l2_pipeline_pm_use(struct media_entity *entity, int use)
Where the 'use' argument shall only be set to '1' for enable/power-on,
or to '0' for disable/power-off. The integer return is specified
as only meaningful when 'use' is set to '1'.
Let's enforce this semantic by splitting the function in two:
v4l2_pipeline_pm_get and v4l2_pipeline_pm_put. This is done
for several reasons.
It makes the API easier to use (or harder to misuse).
It removes the constraint on the values the 'use' argument
shall take. Also, it removes the need to constraint
the return value, by making v4l2_pipeline_pm_put void return.
And last, it's more consistent with other kernel APIs, such
as the runtime pm APIs, which makes the code more symmetric.
Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@collabora.com>
Signed-off-by: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@xs4all.nl>
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
|
|
Using the field information attached to v4l2 buffers is not enough to
determine the type of field referenced by a DPB entry: the decoded
frame might contain the full picture (both top and bottom fields)
but the reference only point to one of them.
Let's add new V4L2_H264_DPB_ENTRY_FLAG_ flags to express that.
[Keep only 2 flags and add some details about they mean]
Signed-off-by: Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@collabora.com>
Signed-off-by: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@xs4all.nl>
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
|
|
This patch makes the internal encoder implementation of the simple
KMS helpers available to drivers.
These simple-encoder helpers initialize an encoder with an empty
implementation. This covers the requirements of most of the existing
DRM drivers. A call to drm_simple_encoder_create() allocates and
initializes an encoder instance, a call to drm_simple_encoder_init()
initializes a pre-allocated instance.
v3:
* remove drm_simple_encoder_create(); not required yet
* provide more precise documentation
v2:
* move simple encoder to KMS helpers
* remove name argument; simplifies implementation
* don't allocate with devm_ interfaces; unsafe with DRM
Signed-off-by: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
Reviewed-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200228081828.18463-2-tzimmermann@suse.de
|
|
There is no need to have 'break;' statement in the default case followed by
return certain string literal when all other cases have returned the string
literals. So, refactor it accordingly.
Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200226101842.29426-4-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
|
|
It's obvious that 'else' keyword is redundant in the code like
if (foo)
return bar;
else if (baz)
...
Drop it for good.
Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200226101842.29426-3-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
|
|
When negative condition is in use we may decrease indentation level
and make the main part of logic better visible.
Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200226101842.29426-2-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
|
|
There is no need to have branch and temporary variable in the function.
Simple convert it to be a set of bit and arithmetic operations.
Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200226101842.29426-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
|
|
On all PHY drivers that implement did_interrupt() reading the interrupt
status bits clears them. This means we may loose an interrupt that
is triggered between calling did_interrupt() and phy_clear_interrupt().
As part of the fix make it a requirement that did_interrupt() clears
the interrupt.
The Fixes tag refers to the first commit where the patch applies
cleanly.
Fixes: 49644e68f472 ("net: phy: add callback for custom interrupt handler to struct phy_driver")
Reported-by: Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>
Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Pull KVM fixes from Paolo Bonzini:
"More bugfixes, including a few remaining "make W=1" issues such as too
large frame sizes on some configurations.
On the ARM side, the compiler was messing up shadow stacks between EL1
and EL2 code, which is easily fixed with __always_inline"
* tag 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm:
KVM: VMX: check descriptor table exits on instruction emulation
kvm: x86: Limit the number of "kvm: disabled by bios" messages
KVM: x86: avoid useless copy of cpufreq policy
KVM: allow disabling -Werror
KVM: x86: allow compiling as non-module with W=1
KVM: Pre-allocate 1 cpumask variable per cpu for both pv tlb and pv ipis
KVM: Introduce pv check helpers
KVM: let declaration of kvm_get_running_vcpus match implementation
KVM: SVM: allocate AVIC data structures based on kvm_amd module parameter
arm64: Ask the compiler to __always_inline functions used by KVM at HYP
KVM: arm64: Define our own swab32() to avoid a uapi static inline
KVM: arm64: Ask the compiler to __always_inline functions used at HYP
kvm: arm/arm64: Fold VHE entry/exit work into kvm_vcpu_run_vhe()
KVM: arm/arm64: Fix up includes for trace.h
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Reviewed-by: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Three virtual devices (ibmveth, virtio_net, and netvsc) all have
similar code to set link settings and validate ethtool command. To
eliminate duplication of code, it is factored out into core/ethtool.c.
Signed-off-by: Cris Forno <cforno12@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Alexei Starovoitov says:
====================
pull-request: bpf-next 2020-02-28
The following pull-request contains BPF updates for your *net-next* tree.
We've added 41 non-merge commits during the last 7 day(s) which contain
a total of 49 files changed, 1383 insertions(+), 499 deletions(-).
The main changes are:
1) BPF and Real-Time nicely co-exist.
2) bpftool feature improvements.
3) retrieve bpf_sk_storage via INET_DIAG.
====================
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: Stefan Schmidt <stefan@datenfreihafen.org>
|
|
When booting with SME active, EFI tables must be mapped unencrypted since
they were built by UEFI in unencrypted memory. Update the list of tables
to be checked during early_memremap() processing to account for the EFI
RNG seed table.
Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@gmx.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/b64385fc13e5d7ad4b459216524f138e7879234f.1582662842.git.thomas.lendacky@amd.com
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200228121408.9075-3-ardb@kernel.org
|
|
The current behavior of the SCSI core is to clear driver-private data
before preparing a request for submission to the SCSI LLD. Make it possible
for SCSI LLDs to disable clearing of driver-private data.
These hooks will be used by a later patch, namely "scsi: ufs: Let the SCSI
core allocate per-command UFS data".
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200123035637.21848-2-bvanassche@acm.org
Cc: Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@intel.com>
Cc: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
Cc: Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>
Cc: Avri Altman <avri.altman@wdc.com>
Cc: Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: Johannes Thumshirn <jth@kernel.org>
Cc: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
|
|
Remove cmd_list functionality; no users left. With that the
scsi_put_command() becomes empty, so remove that one, too.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200228075318.91255-14-hare@suse.de
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Bart van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
|
|
Add an iterator scsi_host_busy_iter() to traverse all busy commands. If
locking against concurrent command completions is required, it has to be
provided by the caller.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200228075318.91255-11-hare@suse.de
Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
|
|
Add helper functions to call scsi_internal_device_block()/
scsi_internal_device_unblock() for all attached devices on a SCSI host.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200228075318.91255-9-hare@suse.de
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
|
|
Add a helper scsi_host_complete_all_commands() to terminate all outstanding
commands on a SCSI host.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200228075318.91255-3-hare@suse.de
Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
|
|
The only users for such argument are the UDP protocol and the UNIX
socket family. We can safely reclaim the accounted memory directly
from the UDP code and, after the previous patch, we can do scm
stats accounting outside the datagram helpers.
Overall this cleans up a bit some datagram-related helpers, and
avoids an indirect call per packet in the UDP receive path.
v1 -> v2:
- call scm_stat_del() only when not peeking - Kirill
- fix build issue with CONFIG_INET_ESPINTCP
Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
So the scm_stat_{add,del} helper can be invoked with no
additional lock held.
This clean-up the code a bit and will make the next
patch easier.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:
struct foo {
int stuff;
struct boo array[];
};
By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.
Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:
"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]
This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732932f ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
