Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 13/16] libelf: use C99 bool for booleans

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

George Dunlap writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 13/16] libelf: use C99 bool for 
booleans"):
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > We want to remove uses of "int" because signed integers have
> > undesirable undefined behaviours on overflow.  Malicious compilers can
> > turn apparently-correct code into code with security vulnerabilities
> > etc.
> 
> So the main point here is to avoid false positives, as opposed to
> actually fixing any potential bugs?  I.e., we can say, "There are
> absolutely no int's anywhere in the code" and can stop worrying about
> int-related bugs?

Exactly.

> Or do you think there may be actual overflow conditions that might
> happen when using an int as a boolean?

No.

> All the changes look fine to me:
> 
> Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks,
Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel