Re: [PATCH/RFC v2 1/1] Use size_t instead of 'unsigned long' for data in memory

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 06:04:54AM +0100, tboegi@xxxxxx wrote:
> From: Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@xxxxxx>
> 
> Currently the length of data which is stored in memory is stored
> in "unsigned long" at many places in the code base.
> This is OK when both "unsigned long" and size_t are 32 bits,
> (and is OK when both are 64 bits).
> On a 64 bit Windows system am "unsigned long" is 32 bit, and
> that may be too short to measure the size of objects in memory,
> a size_t is the natural choice.
> 
> Improve the code base in "small steps", as small as possible.
> The smallest step seems to be much bigger than expected.

Ops, it seems as if I send this message out twice -
please ignore the "PATCH/RFC v2 1/1"
Sorry for the noise.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux