On Fri, 2017-02-03 at 16:03 -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Josef Bacik
> Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 12:00:38 -0500
>
> >
> > These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The
> > first test is
> > just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative
> >
From: Josef Bacik
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 12:00:38 -0500
> These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The first test
> is
> just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative values, even if
> it
> would result in a valid index for the array. The
On 02/02/2017 06:00 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The first test is
just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative values, even if it
would result in a valid index for the array. The second is a cleaned up version
of the
On 2/2/17 9:00 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The first test is
just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative values, even if it
would result in a valid index for the array. The second is a cleaned up version
of the original
These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The first test is
just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative values, even if it
would result in a valid index for the array. The second is a cleaned up version
of the original testcase provided by Jann Horn that