Cydox wrote: > My default stance would be that gcc and the Linux code in question are wrong. > We could reconsider if strict checking is impractical for Linux, but I'd > expect kernel devs to prefer catching accesses one past the end of the array.
If you access the array none of this really matters, as you wouldn't be dealing with `__builtin_dynamic_object_size(acl, 0)`, but instead `__builtin_dynamic_object_size(acl->a_entries, 0)`, which with this fix still computes count multiplied with the size of an array element. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111015 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
