Hi cmd, Cedric and Peter,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cmd <clement.mathieudrif....@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 2:07 PM
> To: Cédric Le Goater <c...@kaod.org>; Jamin Lin <jamin_...@aspeedtech.com>;
> Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>; Steven Lee
> <steven_...@aspeedtech.com>; Troy Lee <leet...@gmail.com>; Andrew
> Jeffery <and...@codeconstruct.com.au>; Joel Stanley <j...@jms.id.au>; open
> list:ASPEED BMCs <qemu-...@nongnu.org>; open list:All patches CC here
> <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
> Cc: Cédric Le Goater <c...@redhat.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] aspeed/soc: Fix possible divide by zero
>
>
> On 25/06/2024 08:03, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> > On 6/25/24 8:00 AM, cmd wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> On 25/06/2024 03:50, Jamin Lin via wrote:
> >>> Coverity reports a possible DIVIDE_BY_ZERO issue regarding the
> >>> "ram_size" object property. This can not happen because RAM has
> >>> predefined valid sizes per SoC. Nevertheless, add a test to close
> >>> the issue.
> >>>
> >>> Fixes: Coverity CID 1547113
> >>> Signed-off-by: Jamin Lin <jamin_...@aspeedtech.com>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Cédric Le Goater <c...@redhat.com> [ clg: Rewrote commit
> >>> log ]
> >>> Signed-off-by: Cédric Le Goater <c...@redhat.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> hw/arm/aspeed_ast27x0.c | 6 ++++++
> >>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/hw/arm/aspeed_ast27x0.c b/hw/arm/aspeed_ast27x0.c index
> >>> b6876b4862..d14a46df6f 100644
> >>> --- a/hw/arm/aspeed_ast27x0.c
> >>> +++ b/hw/arm/aspeed_ast27x0.c
> >>> @@ -211,6 +211,12 @@ static void aspeed_ram_capacity_write(void
> >>> *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t data,
> >>> ram_size = object_property_get_uint(OBJECT(&s->sdmc),
> >>> "ram-size",
> >>> &error_a
> bort);
> >>> + if (!ram_size) {
> >>> + qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR,
> >>> + "%s: ram_size is zero", __func__);
> >>> + return;
> >>> + }
> >>> +
> >> If we are sure that the error cannot happen, shouldn't we assert
> >> instead?
> >
> > Yes. That is what Peter suggested. This needs to be changed.
> >
Thanks for review and suggestion.
How about this change?
assert(ram_size > 0);
If you agree, I will send v3 patch.
Thanks-Jamin
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > C.
> >
> Ok fine, I didn't see the message, sorry!
>
> Thanks
>
> >cmd
>
> >
> >
> >>> /*
> >>> * Emulate ddr capacity hardware behavior.
> >>> * If writes the data to the address which is beyond the ram
> >>> size,
> >
