Julien Grall writes ("Re: [PATCH][4.15] crypto: adjust rijndaelEncrypt() prototype for gcc11"): > On 04/03/2021 11:21, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH][4.15] crypto: adjust rijndaelEncrypt() > > prototype for gcc11"): ... > > It has been idiomatic in some codebases for a long time to write > > const unsigned char[] > > as a formal parameter for an array (of whatever size). > > AFAICT, this is not what GCC is trying to warn about. It is complaining > that the prototype and the declaration doesn't use the same signature.
Oh! I would have to check whether that is legal (I would guess probably it is UB because the C authors hate us all) but I agree that the warning is justified and the code should be changed. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Ian.