Re: [-mm PATCH] signed vs unsigned cleanup in net/ipv4/raw.c

[Jesper Juhl]

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, David S. Miller wrote:

> 
> I'm not merging this thing, at least no all at once.
> 
> "size_t" vs. "unsigned int" vs. "int" length comparisons are where all
> the security problems come from in the protocol stack
> 
> Therefore you should make a seperate patch for each type
> change you make and explain why it doesn't add some regression
> in terms of signedness issues.
> 

Fair enough, I'll split it into little bits and submit them one by one 
with explanations. Not a problem at all.

-- 
Jesper Juhl


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/