Re: [PATCH][4.15] crypto: adjust rijndaelEncrypt() prototype for gcc11

[Ian Jackson <iwj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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.