From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33941)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1UJ1QR-0002Bh-3s
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 08:50:28 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1UJ1QL-0006fk-Ty
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 08:50:27 -0400
Received: from mail-la0-x229.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c03::229]:61854)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1UJ1QL-0006fS-Lz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 08:50:21 -0400
Received: by mail-la0-f41.google.com with SMTP id fo12so7213921lab.14
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 05:50:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20130322122227.GB30604@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
References: <1363329121-20625-1-git-send-email-hutao@cn.fujitsu.com>
	<20130322122227.GB30604@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 12:50:00 +0000
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA-jDhXjRs8FhMc8vmUouGPQwWptNw97HSQG3Lo_bHhsVw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH] memory: fix a bug of
 detection of memory region collision
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: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org, Hu Tao <hutao@cn.fujitsu.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 22 March 2013 12:22, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com> wrote:
> The int128_le() comparison below suggests that int128_gt() really should
> be int128_ge().

Agreed. It might be clearer to rephrase as:

 AddrRange thisrange = addrrange_make(int128_make64(offset),
                                      int128_make64(subregion->size));

 QTAILQ_FOREACH(....) {
     [...]
     AddrRange otherrange = addrrange_make(int128_make64(other->addr),
                                           int128_make64(other->size));
     if (!addrrange_intersects(thisrange, otherrange)) {
         continue;
     }
     [...]
 }

(maybe with a new utility addrrange_make_64() that takes uint64_ts;
there are a few other places in memory.c that could use it.)

-- PMM