On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 12:49:52PM +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote: > On Tue, Jul 27, 2021, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > Resolve all of the abuguity by just making "size" an unsigned value, > > which takes the guesswork out of everything involved. > > > > Pardon my ignorance, but why not size_t instead of an unsigned int? I > feel it will be more clear this way; but, yes, on 64-bit machines this > will extend the buflen param to 64-bit. I have no objection moving it to size_t, but as you say, I don't think it's needed to make the buffer get that big. thanks, greg k-h
