Nouveau - Nov 2023 - [PATCH][next] nouveau/gsp: replace zero-length array with flex-array member and use __counted_by

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.

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.
> 
> 
>