Quoting Jan Beulich <[email protected]>:
On 19.01.16 at 06:57, <[email protected]> wrote:
Fix CID 1343302 by adding checking a check on the value of reg_shift.
This patch also rolls the multiplication by 8 into the shift.
No functional changes.
Suggested-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
I don't think so.
Signed-off-by: Chester Lin <[email protected]>
---
xen/drivers/char/ns16550.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/xen/drivers/char/ns16550.c b/xen/drivers/char/ns16550.c
index bc24015..55cfc45 100644
--- a/xen/drivers/char/ns16550.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/char/ns16550.c
@@ -913,7 +913,8 @@ pci_uart_config(struct ns16550 *uart, bool_t
skip_amt, unsigned int bar_idx)
* Force length of mmio region to be at least
* 8 bytes times (1 << reg_shift)
*/
- if ( size < (0x8 * (1 <<
uart_param[p].reg_shift)) )
+ if ( uart_param[p].reg_shift > 27 ||
+ size < (1 << (uart_param[p].reg_shift + 3)) )
continue;
Instead I think Coverity complaining is mad, and adding a
comparison here just clutters the code. The only thing I could
imagine I might have suggested would be to put an ASSERT()
here.
In any event should is the replacement of the multiplication
by an addition not what I think I had also mentioned before:
The expression, if changed in the first place, should use 8 as
the left operand of the shift.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Sorry for the confusion regarding the suggested-by tag.
Thank you for reviewing our patches. We agree that it would make
more sense to suppress the error in Coverity. As such, we will
not be sending this patch for further review.
Regards,
Chester Lin
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
