From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from list by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.71) id 1XyDui-00048k-Ha for mharc-qemu-trivial@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 01:04:48 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45796) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XyDua-0003zL-CX for qemu-trivial@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 01:04:46 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XyDuU-0005km-CA for qemu-trivial@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 01:04:40 -0500 Received: from mail-r83.rz.uni-mannheim.de ([134.155.96.83]:56280) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XyDuI-0005iW-8h; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 01:04:22 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail-r83.rz.uni-mannheim.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17007101221; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 07:04:21 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at uni-mannheim.de Received: from mail-r83.rz.uni-mannheim.de ([134.155.96.83]) by localhost (smtp.mail.uni-mannheim.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ji97b2qN3NeJ; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 07:04:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.178.35] (p54AC95D5.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.172.149.213]) by mail-r83.rz.uni-mannheim.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A38D31011BB; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 07:04:20 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <548690E3.2090705@weilnetz.de> Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 07:04:19 +0100 From: Stefan Weil User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: zhanghailiang , qemu-trivial@nongnu.org References: <1418103867-11516-1-git-send-email-zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <1418103867-11516-1-git-send-email-zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 134.155.96.83 Cc: armbru@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, afaerber@suse.de, peter.huangpeng@huawei.com Subject: Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vt82c686: fix coverity warning about out-of-bounds write X-BeenThere: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 06:04:46 -0000 Am 09.12.2014 um 06:44 schrieb zhanghailiang: > Refactor superio_ioport_writeb to fix the out of bounds write warning. >=20 > Signed-off-by: zhanghailiang > --- > hw/isa/vt82c686.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++--------------------- > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) >=20 > diff --git a/hw/isa/vt82c686.c b/hw/isa/vt82c686.c > index e0c235c..4516af0 100644 > --- a/hw/isa/vt82c686.c > +++ b/hw/isa/vt82c686.c > @@ -50,13 +50,13 @@ typedef struct VT82C686BState { > static void superio_ioport_writeb(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t = data, > unsigned size) > { > - int can_write; > SuperIOConfig *superio_conf =3D opaque; > =20 > DPRINTF("superio_ioport_writeb address 0x%x val 0x%x\n", addr, d= ata); > if (addr =3D=3D 0x3f0) { > superio_conf->index =3D data & 0xff; > } else { > + int can_write =3D 1; IMHO using bool instead of int would be better here (and false, true in the following code). > /* 0x3f1 */ > switch (superio_conf->index) { > case 0x00 ... 0xdf: > @@ -70,28 +70,25 @@ static void superio_ioport_writeb(void *opaque, hwa= ddr addr, uint64_t data, > case 0xfd ... 0xff: > can_write =3D 0; > break; > - default: > - can_write =3D 1; > - > - if (can_write) { > - switch (superio_conf->index) { > - case 0xe7: > - if ((data & 0xff) !=3D 0xfe) { > - DPRINTF("chage uart 1 base. unsupported yet\n"= ); > - } > - break; > - case 0xe8: > - if ((data & 0xff) !=3D 0xbe) { > - DPRINTF("chage uart 2 base. unsupported yet\n"= ); > - } > - break; > - > - default: > - superio_conf->config[superio_conf->index] =3D data= & 0xff; > - } > + case 0xe7: > + if ((data & 0xff) !=3D 0xfe) { > + DPRINTF("chage uart 1 base. unsupported yet\n"); This text looks strange. Maybe a typo? > + can_write =3D 0; > + } > + break; > + case 0xe8: > + if ((data & 0xff) !=3D 0xbe) { > + DPRINTF("chage uart 2 base. unsupported yet\n"); This text looks strange. Maybe a typo? > + can_write =3D 0; > } > + break; > + default: > + break; > + > + } > + if (can_write) { > + superio_conf->config[superio_conf->index] =3D data & 0xff; > } > - superio_conf->config[superio_conf->index] =3D data & 0xff; > } > } Regards Stefan From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45745) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XyDuO-0003tK-E8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 01:04:34 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XyDuI-0005iv-Ee for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 01:04:28 -0500 Message-ID: <548690E3.2090705@weilnetz.de> Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 07:04:19 +0100 From: Stefan Weil MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1418103867-11516-1-git-send-email-zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <1418103867-11516-1-git-send-email-zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vt82c686: fix coverity warning about out-of-bounds write List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: zhanghailiang , qemu-trivial@nongnu.org Cc: armbru@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, afaerber@suse.de, peter.huangpeng@huawei.com Am 09.12.2014 um 06:44 schrieb zhanghailiang: > Refactor superio_ioport_writeb to fix the out of bounds write warning. >=20 > Signed-off-by: zhanghailiang > --- > hw/isa/vt82c686.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++--------------------- > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) >=20 > diff --git a/hw/isa/vt82c686.c b/hw/isa/vt82c686.c > index e0c235c..4516af0 100644 > --- a/hw/isa/vt82c686.c > +++ b/hw/isa/vt82c686.c > @@ -50,13 +50,13 @@ typedef struct VT82C686BState { > static void superio_ioport_writeb(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t = data, > unsigned size) > { > - int can_write; > SuperIOConfig *superio_conf =3D opaque; > =20 > DPRINTF("superio_ioport_writeb address 0x%x val 0x%x\n", addr, d= ata); > if (addr =3D=3D 0x3f0) { > superio_conf->index =3D data & 0xff; > } else { > + int can_write =3D 1; IMHO using bool instead of int would be better here (and false, true in the following code). > /* 0x3f1 */ > switch (superio_conf->index) { > case 0x00 ... 0xdf: > @@ -70,28 +70,25 @@ static void superio_ioport_writeb(void *opaque, hwa= ddr addr, uint64_t data, > case 0xfd ... 0xff: > can_write =3D 0; > break; > - default: > - can_write =3D 1; > - > - if (can_write) { > - switch (superio_conf->index) { > - case 0xe7: > - if ((data & 0xff) !=3D 0xfe) { > - DPRINTF("chage uart 1 base. unsupported yet\n"= ); > - } > - break; > - case 0xe8: > - if ((data & 0xff) !=3D 0xbe) { > - DPRINTF("chage uart 2 base. unsupported yet\n"= ); > - } > - break; > - > - default: > - superio_conf->config[superio_conf->index] =3D data= & 0xff; > - } > + case 0xe7: > + if ((data & 0xff) !=3D 0xfe) { > + DPRINTF("chage uart 1 base. unsupported yet\n"); This text looks strange. Maybe a typo? > + can_write =3D 0; > + } > + break; > + case 0xe8: > + if ((data & 0xff) !=3D 0xbe) { > + DPRINTF("chage uart 2 base. unsupported yet\n"); This text looks strange. Maybe a typo? > + can_write =3D 0; > } > + break; > + default: > + break; > + > + } > + if (can_write) { > + superio_conf->config[superio_conf->index] =3D data & 0xff; > } > - superio_conf->config[superio_conf->index] =3D data & 0xff; > } > } Regards Stefan