On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 04:30:57PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> On 05/05/11 16:21, Alex Williamson wrote:
> >> > A bit worried that ram_addr_t size might thinkably overflow
> >> > (it's just a long, could be a 4G ram). Break it out when it fills up?
> > struct CPUPhysMemoryClient {
> > void (*set_memory)(struct CPUPhysMemoryClient *client,
> > target_phys_addr_t start_addr,
> > ram_addr_t size,
> > ram_addr_t phys_offset);
> >
> > ram_addr_t seems to be the standard for describing these types of
> > things. It's an unsigned long, so 4G is only concern for 32b builds,
> > which don't support that much memory anyway. Please apply. Thanks,
>
> A memory size can obviously not be bigger than the maximum physical
> address, so I find it really hard to see how this could overflow.
For example, a 4G size does not fit in 32 bits.
> It seems fair to use it for the size here.
>
> Acked-by: Jes Sorensen <jes.soren...@redhat.com>
>
