Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH][next] nouveau/gsp: replace zero-length array with flex-array member and use __counted_by

2023-11-28 Thread Danilo Krummrich

On 11/29/23 02:06, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:



On 11/28/23 19:01, Danilo Krummrich wrote:

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.


No problem.


Applied to drm-misc-fixes.



Thanks
--
Gustavo






Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH][next] nouveau/gsp: replace zero-length array with flex-array member and use __counted_by

2023-11-28 Thread Gustavo A. R. Silva




On 11/28/23 19:01, Danilo Krummrich wrote:

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.


No problem.

Thanks
--
Gustavo




Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH][next] nouveau/gsp: replace zero-length array with flex-array member and use __counted_by

2023-11-28 Thread Danilo Krummrich

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.







Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH][next] nouveau/gsp: replace zero-length array with flex-array member and use __counted_by

2023-11-16 Thread Timur Tabi
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.

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.





Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH][next] nouveau/gsp: replace zero-length array with flex-array member and use __counted_by

2023-11-16 Thread Danilo Krummrich
Hi Gustavo,

On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 12:11:43PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> Fake flexible arrays (zero-length and one-element arrays) are deprecated,
> and should be replaced by flexible-array members. So, replace
> zero-length array with a flexible-array member in `struct
> PACKED_REGISTRY_TABLE`.
> 
> Also annotate array `entries` with `__counted_by()` to prepare for the
> coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the `__counted_by` attribute.
> Flexible array members annotated with `__counted_by` can have their
> accesses bounds-checked at run-time via `CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS` (for array
> indexing) and `CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE` (for strcpy/memcpy-family functions).
> 
> This fixes multiple -Warray-bounds warnings:
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c:1069:29: warning: array 
> subscript 0 is outside array bounds of 'PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY[0]' 
> [-Warray-bounds=]
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c:1070:29: warning: array 
> subscript 0 is outside array bounds of 'PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY[0]' 
> [-Warray-bounds=]
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c:1071:29: warning: array 
> subscript 0 is outside array bounds of 'PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY[0]' 
> [-Warray-bounds=]
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c:1072:29: warning: array 
> subscript 0 is outside array bounds of 'PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY[0]' 
> [-Warray-bounds=]
> 
> While there, also make use of the struct_size() helper, and address
> checkpatch.pl warning:
> WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
> 
> This results in no differences in binary output.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva 
> ---
>  .../nvrm/535.113.01/nvidia/generated/g_os_nvoc.h   | 14 +++---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c |  2 +-
>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git 
> a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/include/nvrm/535.113.01/nvidia/generated/g_os_nvoc.h
>  
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/include/nvrm/535.113.01/nvidia/generated/g_os_nvoc.h
> index 754c6af42f30..259b25c2ac6b 100644
> --- 
> a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/include/nvrm/535.113.01/nvidia/generated/g_os_nvoc.h
> +++ 
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/include/nvrm/535.113.01/nvidia/generated/g_os_nvoc.h
> @@ -28,17 +28,17 @@
>  
>  typedef struct PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY
>  {
> -NvU32   nameOffset;
> -NvU8type;
> -NvU32   data;
> -NvU32   length;
> + NvU32   nameOffset;
> + NvU8type;
> + NvU32   data;
> + NvU32   length;
>  } PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY;
>  
>  typedef struct PACKED_REGISTRY_TABLE
>  {
> -NvU32   size;
> -NvU32   numEntries;
> -PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY   entries[0];
> + NvU32   size;
> + NvU32   numEntries;
> + PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY   entries[] __counted_by(numEntries);
>  } PACKED_REGISTRY_TABLE;

Thanks for the fix!

However, I have some concerns about changing those header files, since they're
just copied over from Nvidia's driver [1].

Once we add the header files for a new firmware revision, we'd potentially run
into the same issue, applying the same fix again.

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.

If we can't get a fix upstream, I'd probably prefer to silence warning
elsewhere.

[1] https://github.com/NVIDIA/open-gpu-kernel-modules
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231107234726.854248-1-tt...@nvidia.com/T/

>  
>  #endif
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c 
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c
> index dc44f5c7833f..228335487af5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c
> @@ -1048,7 +1048,7 @@ r535_gsp_rpc_set_registry(struct nvkm_gsp *gsp)
>   char *strings;
>   int str_offset;
>   int i;
> - size_t rpc_size = sizeof(*rpc) + sizeof(rpc->entries[0]) * 
> NV_GSP_REG_NUM_ENTRIES;
> + size_t rpc_size = struct_size(rpc, entries, NV_GSP_REG_NUM_ENTRIES);
>  
>   /* add strings + null terminator */
>   for (i = 0; i < NV_GSP_REG_NUM_ENTRIES; i++)
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 



Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH][next] nouveau/gsp: replace zero-length array with flex-array member and use __counted_by

2023-11-16 Thread Timur Tabi
On Thu, 2023-11-16 at 12:11 -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
 typedef struct PACKED_REGISTRY_TABLE
 {
-NvU32   size;
-NvU32   numEntries;
-PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY   entries[0];
+   NvU32   size;
+   NvU32   numEntries;
+   PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY   entries[] __counted_by(numEntries);
 } PACKED_REGISTRY_TABLE;

Well, it's better than mine: 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231107234726.854248-1-tt...@nvidia.com/T/


Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH][next] nouveau/gsp: replace zero-length array with flex-array member and use __counted_by

2023-11-16 Thread Kees Cook
On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 12:11:43PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> Fake flexible arrays (zero-length and one-element arrays) are deprecated,
> and should be replaced by flexible-array members. So, replace
> zero-length array with a flexible-array member in `struct
> PACKED_REGISTRY_TABLE`.
> 
> Also annotate array `entries` with `__counted_by()` to prepare for the
> coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the `__counted_by` attribute.
> Flexible array members annotated with `__counted_by` can have their
> accesses bounds-checked at run-time via `CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS` (for array
> indexing) and `CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE` (for strcpy/memcpy-family functions).
> 
> This fixes multiple -Warray-bounds warnings:
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c:1069:29: warning: array 
> subscript 0 is outside array bounds of 'PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY[0]' 
> [-Warray-bounds=]
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c:1070:29: warning: array 
> subscript 0 is outside array bounds of 'PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY[0]' 
> [-Warray-bounds=]
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c:1071:29: warning: array 
> subscript 0 is outside array bounds of 'PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY[0]' 
> [-Warray-bounds=]
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c:1072:29: warning: array 
> subscript 0 is outside array bounds of 'PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY[0]' 
> [-Warray-bounds=]
> 
> While there, also make use of the struct_size() helper, and address
> checkpatch.pl warning:
> WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
> 
> This results in no differences in binary output.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva 

Looks nice to me.

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook 

-- 
Kees Cook


[Nouveau] [PATCH][next] nouveau/gsp: replace zero-length array with flex-array member and use __counted_by

2023-11-16 Thread Gustavo A. R. Silva
Fake flexible arrays (zero-length and one-element arrays) are deprecated,
and should be replaced by flexible-array members. So, replace
zero-length array with a flexible-array member in `struct
PACKED_REGISTRY_TABLE`.

Also annotate array `entries` with `__counted_by()` to prepare for the
coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the `__counted_by` attribute.
Flexible array members annotated with `__counted_by` can have their
accesses bounds-checked at run-time via `CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS` (for array
indexing) and `CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE` (for strcpy/memcpy-family functions).

This fixes multiple -Warray-bounds warnings:
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c:1069:29: warning: array 
subscript 0 is outside array bounds of 'PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY[0]' 
[-Warray-bounds=]
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c:1070:29: warning: array 
subscript 0 is outside array bounds of 'PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY[0]' 
[-Warray-bounds=]
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c:1071:29: warning: array 
subscript 0 is outside array bounds of 'PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY[0]' 
[-Warray-bounds=]
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c:1072:29: warning: array 
subscript 0 is outside array bounds of 'PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY[0]' 
[-Warray-bounds=]

While there, also make use of the struct_size() helper, and address
checkpatch.pl warning:
WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line

This results in no differences in binary output.

Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva 
---
 .../nvrm/535.113.01/nvidia/generated/g_os_nvoc.h   | 14 +++---
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c |  2 +-
 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git 
a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/include/nvrm/535.113.01/nvidia/generated/g_os_nvoc.h 
b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/include/nvrm/535.113.01/nvidia/generated/g_os_nvoc.h
index 754c6af42f30..259b25c2ac6b 100644
--- 
a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/include/nvrm/535.113.01/nvidia/generated/g_os_nvoc.h
+++ 
b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/include/nvrm/535.113.01/nvidia/generated/g_os_nvoc.h
@@ -28,17 +28,17 @@
 
 typedef struct PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY
 {
-NvU32   nameOffset;
-NvU8type;
-NvU32   data;
-NvU32   length;
+   NvU32   nameOffset;
+   NvU8type;
+   NvU32   data;
+   NvU32   length;
 } PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY;
 
 typedef struct PACKED_REGISTRY_TABLE
 {
-NvU32   size;
-NvU32   numEntries;
-PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY   entries[0];
+   NvU32   size;
+   NvU32   numEntries;
+   PACKED_REGISTRY_ENTRY   entries[] __counted_by(numEntries);
 } PACKED_REGISTRY_TABLE;
 
 #endif
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c 
b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c
index dc44f5c7833f..228335487af5 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c
@@ -1048,7 +1048,7 @@ r535_gsp_rpc_set_registry(struct nvkm_gsp *gsp)
char *strings;
int str_offset;
int i;
-   size_t rpc_size = sizeof(*rpc) + sizeof(rpc->entries[0]) * 
NV_GSP_REG_NUM_ENTRIES;
+   size_t rpc_size = struct_size(rpc, entries, NV_GSP_REG_NUM_ENTRIES);
 
/* add strings + null terminator */
for (i = 0; i < NV_GSP_REG_NUM_ENTRIES; i++)
-- 
2.34.1