"Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 03:18:29PM +0200, arm...@redhat.com wrote:
>> From: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
>>
>> So that it can be set in config file for -readconfig.
>>
>> This tightens parsing of -smbios, and makes it more consistent with
>> other options: unknown parameters are rejected, numbers with trailing
>> junk are rejected, when a parameter is given multiple times, last
>> rather than first wins, ...
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com>
[...]
>> diff --git a/hw/i386/smbios.c b/hw/i386/smbios.c
>> index 0608aee..a113f8b 100644
>> --- a/hw/i386/smbios.c
>> +++ b/hw/i386/smbios.c
[...]
>> @@ -225,17 +346,29 @@ void smbios_entry_add(const char *t)
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> - if (get_param_value(buf, sizeof(buf), "type", t)) {
>> - unsigned long type = strtoul(buf, NULL, 0);
>> + val = qemu_opt_get(opts, "type");
>> + if (val) {
>> + unsigned long type = strtoul(val, NULL, 0);
>> +
>> switch (type) {
>> case 0:
>> - smbios_build_type_0_fields(t);
>> + qemu_opts_validate(opts, qemu_smbios_type0_opts, &local_err);
>> + if (local_err) {
>> + error_report("%s", error_get_pretty(local_err));
>> + exit(1);
>> + }
>> + smbios_build_type_0_fields(opts);
>> return;
>> case 1:
>> - smbios_build_type_1_fields(t);
>> + qemu_opts_validate(opts, qemu_smbios_type1_opts, &local_err);
>> + if (local_err) {
>> + error_report("%s", error_get_pretty(local_err));
>> + exit(1);
>> + }
>> + smbios_build_type_1_fields(opts);
>> return;
>> default:
>> - error_report("Don't know how to build fields for SMBIOS type
>> %ld",
>> + error_report("Don't know how to build fields for SMBIOS type %"
>> PRIu64,
>> type);
>> exit(1);
>> }
>
> This triggers a build failure:
>
> /scm/qemu/hw/i386/smbios.c: In function ‘smbios_entry_add’:
> /scm/qemu/hw/i386/smbios.c:382:26: error: format ‘%llu’ expects argument
> of type ‘long long unsigned int’, but argument 2 has type ‘long unsigned
> int’ [-Werror=format=]
> type);
> ^
>
> It's a long value, why are you printing it with PRIu64?
> %ld seems right.
Yup.
> I reverted just this chunk.
Thanks for catching this. My compiler doesn't :(
[...]
