On 02/10/16 16:29, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 10/02/2016 15:55, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
Hmm, not sure why. We're comparing against the inclusive-exclusive
range [0,s->vga.vram_size). The right way to check if something is
within the range is >= min && < max; the right way to
On 10/02/2016 15:55, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> > Hmm, not sure why. We're comparing against the inclusive-exclusive
>> > range [0,s->vga.vram_size). The right way to check if something is
>> > within the range is >= min && < max; the right way to check if something
>> > is outside the range is <
On 02/10/16 13:32, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 09/02/2016 20:08, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> On 02/09/16 11:59, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> The "max" value is being compared with >=, but addr + width points to
>>> the first byte that will _not_ be copied. Subtract one like it is
>>> already done
On 10/02/2016 16:54, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 02/10/16 16:29, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/02/2016 15:55, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> Hmm, not sure why. We're comparing against the inclusive-exclusive
> range [0,s->vga.vram_size). The right way to check if something is
> within
On 09/02/2016 20:08, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 02/09/16 11:59, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> The "max" value is being compared with >=, but addr + width points to
>> the first byte that will _not_ be copied. Subtract one like it is
>> already done above for the height.
>>
>> Cc: Gerd Hoffmann
The "max" value is being compared with >=, but addr + width points to
the first byte that will _not_ be copied. Subtract one like it is
already done above for the height.
Cc: Gerd Hoffmann
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini
---
hw/display/cirrus_vga.c | 4
On 02/09/16 11:59, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> The "max" value is being compared with >=, but addr + width points to
> the first byte that will _not_ be copied. Subtract one like it is
> already done above for the height.
>
> Cc: Gerd Hoffmann
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini