Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 14/16] libelf: use only unsigned integers

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 07.06.13 at 16:35, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 14/16] libelf: use only unsigned 
> integers"):
>> On 06.06.13 at 20:14, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Yes, we can be sure that sizeof(int)==sizeof(unsigned), forever and
>> > always.  If they weren't the right size as the things in the elf then
>> > the code was broken before :-).
>> > 
>> > I'm changing this so you can grep for \bint\b afterwards and see a
>> > very small number of hits left.
>> 
>> But there's a point in what George says nevertheless: What is this
>> sizeof(int) (now sizeof(unsigned)) referring to anyway?
> 
> Yes, I agree that there is a point.  However what we are trying to do
> here is prepare a security patch.
> 
> Fixes to braindamage of this kind should not appear in security
> patches because security patches shouldn't change anything they don't
> need to.

As long as you're convinced that this doesn't have an impact on
security, I agree.

> Anything which is broken before the security patch can safely remain
> broken afterwards.

Sure.

Jan


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