From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Received: (qmail 12006 invoked from network); 21 Feb 2023 16:42:30 -0000
Received: from second.openwall.net (193.110.157.125)
  by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 21 Feb 2023 16:42:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 21754 invoked by uid 550); 21 Feb 2023 16:42:27 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-ID: <musl.lists.openwall.com>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Received: (qmail 21731 invoked from network); 21 Feb 2023 16:42:26 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com;
	s=mimecast20190719; t=1676997735;
	h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
	 to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=YrW2kjoAevhxKvVDNsONaOYREn0mGE0v45pk+hr9pcI=;
	b=b3aXEzIqPfyigBE07es5fXQlJEXRYZc6B3tCmbbGN+5DZBcjqpIUSyfkQnGLe2tsB0lkEf
	cdvx/d5JneI57fBU0m545AIqxqJxXzbSSA/bd6rMYNTTTWXGo6mwaZn/JIloi7KyRjdWI2
	FGB7PiJfFRz1Bx5+rsUzMJy6MZyW4/s=
X-MC-Unique: IgXb-beCPH-rXBk0Havd9Q-1
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Markus Wichmann <nullplan@gmx.net>
Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com
References: <99826a90-6658-099e-9df8-d0bba78b8f0f@gmail.com>
	<20230221160455.GF1903@voyager>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2023 17:42:08 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20230221160455.GF1903@voyager> (Markus Wichmann's message of
	"Tue, 21 Feb 2023 17:04:55 +0100")
Message-ID: <878rgrotr3.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.2
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [musl] Re: [BUG] ioctl: overflow in implicit constant conversion

* Markus Wichmann:

> So this issue could be resolved by simply making the second argument of
> the ioctl() function unsigned. Does that create ABI issues?

POSIX mandates the int type.

Thanks,
Florian