On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 11:22:23PM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 12:02:13AM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > > > > Gustavo, > > > > > Friendly ping: who can review or comment on this series, please? > > > > I'm afraid I don't have any hardware to test it on and the generated > > output differs substantially from the original code. > > Yeah; this series requires careful review from the people that > knows the code better. > > It took me a day of work to go through all the places that needed > to be changed due to the flexible array transformation. However, > due to the kind of changes, it'd be great to have a second opinion > or at least someone that could take a look at the changes. If the int/size_t changes are separated from the array size change, it's easier to see the array size change is a binary no-op. (i.e. diffoscope shows no executable changes.) I'd recommend splitting the int/size_t changes from the array size changes. -- Kees Cook
