https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101836
--- Comment #36 from James Y Knight <foom at fuhm dot net> --- (In reply to Kees Cook from comment #34) > > Great. Adding that flag, and eliminating the -fstrict-flex-arrays=3 option > > from this proposal would be good. > > Hmm? No, -fstrict-flex-arrays=3 is still needed (because it changes compiler > _behavior_, e.g. for proper FORTIFY coverage or trailing arrays, etc). There is no purpose served by writing a struct member `int x[0];` other than to create a FAM. Zero-length arrays are not permitted by the C standard, but are a GCC compiler extension explicitly for the purpose of creating a FAM. This is entirely unlike `int x[1];` or `int x[10];` which of course have a primary meaning as a concrete array size... If the linux kernel doesn't want to allow `int x[0];` FAMs, then prohibit them entirely using -Werror=zero-length-array (once it's implemented).
