Fix size alignment in the integer overflow issue

kar-rahul-aws commented 1 year ago

Description

This PR fixes size alignment issue introduced in PR#836

Test Steps

Tested using STM32H743ZI demo project.

Checklist:

[x] I have tested my changes. No regression in existing tests.
[ ] I have modified and/or added unit-tests to cover the code changes in this Pull Request.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

codecov[bot] commented 1 year ago

Codecov Report

All modified lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Comparison is base (2207715) 93.64% compared to head (0fd7e67) 93.64%.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #839 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 93.64% 93.64% ======================================= Files 6 6 Lines 2549 2549 Branches 608 608 ======================================= Hits 2387 2387 Misses 107 107 Partials 55 55 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/FreeRTOS/FreeRTOS-Kernel/pull/839/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/FreeRTOS/FreeRTOS-Kernel/pull/839/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS) | `93.64% <ø> (ø)` | | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.