Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] intel_iommu: Fix incorrect "end" for vtd_address_space_unmap

[Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>]

On 2019/6/24 下午5:18, 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]
> Reviewed-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> ---
>   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);


Acked-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>