On 01/28/2012 08:13 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
> Fix suspend/resume broken by off-by-one error in
> 59abb06198ee9471e29c970f294eae80c0b39be1.
>
> Adjust the loop so that it handles correctly the case
> start = (ram_addr_t)-TARGET_PAGE_SIZE, length = TARGET_PAGE_SIZE.
Is the ram_addr_t even legal? ram addresses start from 0 and end up
around ~(ram_addr_t)0 >> 1, max.
> Reported-by: Stefan Berger <stef...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Blue Swirl <blauwir...@gmail.com>
> ---
> exec-obsolete.h | 10 ++++------
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/exec-obsolete.h b/exec-obsolete.h
> index 03cf35e..1bba970 100644
> --- a/exec-obsolete.h
> +++ b/exec-obsolete.h
> @@ -81,11 +81,10 @@ static inline void
> cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_range(ram_addr_t start,
> int dirty_flags)
> {
> uint8_t *p;
> - ram_addr_t addr, end;
> + ram_addr_t cur;
>
> - end = start + length;
> p = ram_list.phys_dirty + (start >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS);
> - for (addr = start; addr <= end; addr += TARGET_PAGE_SIZE) {
> + for (cur = 0; cur < length; cur += TARGET_PAGE_SIZE) {
> *p++ |= dirty_flags;
> }
> }
> @@ -96,12 +95,11 @@ static inline void
> cpu_physical_memory_mask_dirty_range(ram_addr_t start,
> {
> int mask;
> uint8_t *p;
> - ram_addr_t addr, end;
> + ram_addr_t cur;
>
> - end = start + length;
> mask = ~dirty_flags;
> p = ram_list.phys_dirty + (start >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS);
> - for (addr = start; addr <= end; addr += TARGET_PAGE_SIZE) {
> + for (cur = 0; cur < length; cur += TARGET_PAGE_SIZE) {
> *p++ &= mask;
> }
> }
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
