Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] intel_iommu: Fix incorrect "end" for vtd_address_space_unmap

[Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com>]

Hi Peter,
On 6/24/19 8:37 AM, Peter Xu wrote:
> From: Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>
> 
> IOMMUNotifier is with inclusive ranges, so we should check
> against (VTD_ADDRESS_SIZE(s->aw_bits) - 1).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>
> [peterx: split from another bigger patch]
> Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>

Thanks

Eric
> ---
>  hw/i386/intel_iommu.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> index 44b1231157..719ce19ab3 100644
> --- a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> +++ b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> @@ -3379,12 +3379,12 @@ static void vtd_address_space_unmap(VTDAddressSpace *as, IOMMUNotifier *n)
>       * VT-d spec), otherwise we need to consider overflow of 64 bits.
>       */
>  
> -    if (end > VTD_ADDRESS_SIZE(s->aw_bits)) {
> +    if (end > VTD_ADDRESS_SIZE(s->aw_bits) - 1) {
>          /*
>           * Don't need to unmap regions that is bigger than the whole
>           * VT-d supported address space size
>           */
> -        end = VTD_ADDRESS_SIZE(s->aw_bits);
> +        end = VTD_ADDRESS_SIZE(s->aw_bits) - 1;
>      }
>  
>      assert(start <= end);
>