On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 09:50:10 -0800
Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 07:47:36PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 09:29:39AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > 3 bytes were being read but 4 were being written. Explicitly initialize
> > > the unused bytes to 0 and ref
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 07:47:36PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 09:29:39AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> > 3 bytes were being read but 4 were being written. Explicitly initialize
> > the unused bytes to 0 and refactor the loop to use direct array
> > indexing, which appears t
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 07:47:36PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 09:29:39AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> > 3 bytes were being read but 4 were being written. Explicitly initialize
> > the unused bytes to 0 and refactor the loop to use direct array
> > indexing, which appears t
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 09:29:39AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> 3 bytes were being read but 4 were being written. Explicitly initialize
> the unused bytes to 0 and refactor the loop to use direct array
> indexing, which appears to silence a Clang false positive warning[1].
...
> for_each_set_b
