[PATCH] bfd robustification (arithmetic overflows on allocation in elf.c and corrupt version section handling)
Jakub Jelinek
jakub@redhat.com
Mon Jul 4 19:16:00 GMT 2005
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 04:12:31PM +0100, Nick Clifton wrote:
> But ... have you looked at PR binutils/868 ? It applies particularly to
> the use of the realloc() function, but it might be worth considering in
> the wider context of the changes that you are making.
I think that should be orthogonal to those changes. So bfd could provide
bfd_realloc, bfd_realloc_or_free, bfd_realloc2 and bfd_realloc2_or_free.
> >+#define HALF_BFD_SIZE_TYPE \
> >+ (((bfd_size_type) 1) << (8 * sizeof (bfd_size_type) / 2))
>
> Hmm, does this 8 assume that a byte is an 8-bit quantity ?
It does, but I thought we rely on the host char being 8 bit,
only target char can be different. I could use CHAR_BIT instead,
but nothing in bfd/binutils/ld uses CHAR_BIT ATM, so it would
surprise me if it worked at all with CHAR_BIT != 8.
Jakub
More information about the Binutils
mailing list