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

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 04.03.2021 13:41, Ian Jackson wrote:
> 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.

May I translate this into a release ack then?

Jan