>>> On 05.11.15 at 12:51, <ross.lagerw...@citrix.com> wrote:
> On 11/05/2015 10:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 04.11.15 at 23:21, <konrad.w...@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> +int xsplice_perform_rela(struct xsplice_elf *elf,
>>>> + struct xsplice_elf_sec *base,
>>>> + struct xsplice_elf_sec *rela)
>>>> +{
>>>> + Elf64_Rela *r;
>>>> + int symndx, i;
>>>
>>> unsigned int
>>>
>>>> + uint64_t val;
>>>> + uint8_t *dest;
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Can you double check that rela->sec-sh_entsize is not zero first?
>>
>> Perhaps not just not zero, but at least a certain minimum? Or even
>> equaling some sizeof()?
>>
>
> Well it only makes sense if rela->sec-sh_entsize == sizeof(Elf64_Rela)
> so that is what I shall check for.
The question whether to use == or >= really depends on whether
we expect (theoretical) additions to the structure to be backwards
compatible.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
