On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 08:54:41AM +0000, Martijn van Buul wrote:
> Now, if only I knew *what* he is onto :D

Slipping past the rhetoric, the main complaint seems to be about
size argument checking in malloc/calloc/realloc, or perhaps the
kernel equivalents, particularly overflows arising from 64-bit
size_t args being cast to 32-bit unsigned's for range checking.

There was also something about comparing size to 65535 *
PAGE_SIZE, which seemed like a strange and unlikely hard-coded
limit, to me...

Cheers,

-- 
Andrew