On 08/03/17 13:28, Peter Rosin wrote:
> Comparing a size_t with less than zero is always false as size_t
> is unsigned. So, change the type of the variable to ssize_t and
> replicate the size check from mux_configure_channel() into
> mux_write_ext_info() thus ensuring that the size will fit in the
On 08/03/17 13:28, Peter Rosin wrote:
> Comparing a size_t with less than zero is always false as size_t
> is unsigned. So, change the type of the variable to ssize_t and
> replicate the size check from mux_configure_channel() into
> mux_write_ext_info() thus ensuring that the size will fit in the
Comparing a size_t with less than zero is always false as size_t
is unsigned. So, change the type of the variable to ssize_t and
replicate the size check from mux_configure_channel() into
mux_write_ext_info() thus ensuring that the size will fit in the
ssize_t variable.
Detected by CoverityScan,
Comparing a size_t with less than zero is always false as size_t
is unsigned. So, change the type of the variable to ssize_t and
replicate the size check from mux_configure_channel() into
mux_write_ext_info() thus ensuring that the size will fit in the
ssize_t variable.
Detected by CoverityScan,
4 matches
Mail list logo