From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53656)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1Zwvs6-0002uG-9R
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:41:19 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1Zwvs3-0003Tt-3m
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:41:18 -0500
Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:39147)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1Zwvs2-0003TX-TS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:41:15 -0500
References: <1425478186-18894-1-git-send-email-ild@inbox.ru>
	<87io83jvug.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<CAFEAcA9UWYzOWgtaEQ+P12uXEFEpCdxR1oMt4N9FeYHGDeZXig@mail.gmail.com>
	<87wptohq5k.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_F=c3=a4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>
Message-ID: <5644CF37.8060801@suse.de>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 18:41:11 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87wptohq5k.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] include/hw: field 'offset' in struct
 Property should be ptrdiff_t as int causes overflow
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, Ildar Isaev <ild@inbox.ru>, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>

Am 11.11.2015 um 09:54 schrieb Markus Armbruster:
> Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes:
>> On 25 August 2015 at 15:17, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrot=
e:
>>> Stumbled over this while throwing away old mail.  Andreas, what do yo=
u
>>> think?
>>
>> Seems right to me -- I suspect the original properties code was
>> written with the assumption that the property field would be
>> inside the device struct (and so offsets are small). The array
>> properties code breaks that assumption by allocating a separate
>> lump of memory with the properties in it; so now there's no
>> guarantee that the two pointers being subtracted will be
>> within 4G of each other.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
>>
>> Arguably for consistency the 'arrayoffset' struct member should
>> also be a ptrdiff_t, though our current uses of it are such
>> that it'll always be within int range.
>=20
> Andreas?

Found it archived. I honestly don't think it's necessary in practice to
have 64-bit offsets on 64-bit host, but it builds okay, queued. Testing
got stuck in ahci though, investigating.

Thanks,
Andreas

--=20
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imend=F6rffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG N=FC=
rnberg)