On Mon, Mar 30, 2026 at 3:39 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]> wrote: > > Apparently, struct bpf_empty_prog_array exists entirely to populate a > single element of "items" in a global variable. "null_prog" is only > used during the initializer. > > None of this is needed; globals will be correctly sized with an array > initializer of a flexible-array member. > > So, remove struct bpf_empty_prog_array and adjust the rest of the code, > accordingly. > > With these changes, fix the following warnings: > > 7659 ./include/linux/bpf.h:2369:31: warning: structure containing a flexible > array member is not at the end of another structure > [-Wflex-array-member-not-at-end] > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]> > --- > Changes in v2: > - Remove struct bpf_empty_prog_array. (Kees)
Kees, It really bothers me that you ask people to clean up warnings for the sake of removing warnings. This has to stop. This patch adds a ticking time bomb. See bpf_prog_run_array_cg() and think why it's an exploit waiting to happen. Fixing -Wflex-array-member-not-at-end warnings make the kernel more secure... It's the opposite! Such crusade against warnings introduces subtle bugs. Look, this patch was Acked. bpf CI is green. No failing tests and I was about to apply it, since it looked correct on the first glance, but something felt wrong... 'null_prog' was there for a reason. I so hate this "hardening" cleanups that introduce bugs. pw-bot: cr
