[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <08d258a3-1710-4d2f-815d-3d16a3dc928b@t-8ch.de>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2026 10:18:02 +0100
From: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
To: "Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)" <chleroy@...nel.org>
Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...sung.com>,
Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, Naveen N Rao <naveen@...nel.org>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>, Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>,
Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>, Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>,
Nicolas Schier <nicolas.schier@...ux.dev>, Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...nel.org>,
Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...mlin.com>, Nicolas Schier <nsc@...nel.org>,
Nicolas Bouchinet <nicolas.bouchinet@....cyber.gouv.fr>, Xiu Jianfeng <xiujianfeng@...wei.com>,
Fabian Grünbichler <f.gruenbichler@...xmox.com>, Arnout Engelen <arnout@...t.net>,
Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@...reri.org>, kpcyrd <kpcyrd@...hlinux.org>,
Christian Heusel <christian@...sel.eu>, Câju Mihai-Drosi <mcaju95@...il.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/17] module: Switch load_info::len to size_t
On 2026-02-06 10:09:12+0100, Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP) wrote:
>
>
> Le 13/01/2026 à 13:28, Thomas Weißschuh a écrit :
> > Switching the types will make some later changes cleaner.
> > size_t is also the semantically correct type for this field.
> >
> > As both 'size_t' and 'unsigned int' are always the same size, this
> > should be risk-free.
> Are you sure ?
As mentioned before by David [0], this should have been 'unsigned long'
instead of 'unsigned int'. Which is also what the diff shows.
> Some architectures have size_t as 'unsigned int', some have 'unsigned long',
> some have 'unsigned long long'
(...)
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2919071.1770365933@warthog.procyon.org.uk/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists