On 20/2/23 10:09, Mathis MARION wrote:
On 20/02/2023 10:06, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >> On 20/2/23 09:58, Mathis
Marion wrote:
From: Mathis Marion <mathis.mar...@silabs.com>
Fields sin6_flowinfo and sin6_scope_id use the host byte order, so there
is a conversion to be made when host and target endianness differ.
Signed-off-by: Mathis Marion <mathis.mar...@silabs.com>
---
linux-user/syscall.c | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/linux-user/syscall.c b/linux-user/syscall.c
index 58549de125..1a6856abec 100644
--- a/linux-user/syscall.c
+++ b/linux-user/syscall.c
@@ -1713,6 +1713,12 @@ static inline abi_long
target_to_host_sockaddr(int fd, struct sockaddr *addr,
lladdr = (struct target_sockaddr_ll *)addr;
lladdr->sll_ifindex = tswap32(lladdr->sll_ifindex);
lladdr->sll_hatype = tswap16(lladdr->sll_hatype);
+ } else if (sa_family == AF_INET6) {
+ struct sockaddr_in6 *in6addr;
+
+ in6addr = (struct sockaddr_in6 *)addr;
+ in6addr->sin6_flowinfo = tswap32(in6addr->sin6_flowinfo);
+ in6addr->sin6_scope_id = tswap32(in6addr->sin6_scope_id);
}
unlock_user(target_saddr, target_addr, 0);
Same content as v1, right?
If you don't change patch content, please include the reviewer tags
so we don't have to review your patches again.
So similarly to
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/6be6bf58-cf92-7068-008e-83f5543a1...@linaro.org/__;!!N30Cs7Jr!X8OE0Z6gfU2FYtWrk0_Dhk_gUPlhqRPtJ60B7HxeicEaFDDFCLRsmoqhnC3MXGOw7ZfEkgLQhDwsyQv76w$
Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@linaro.org>
Yes, I am still new to this. Thank you for you consideration, I will
remember it for next time.
Sorry I didn't notice you are new because your patch series already
have a very high quality :)
You can see guidelines here:
https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/devel/submitting-a-patch.html#proper-use-of-reviewed-by-tags-can-aid-review
In particular:
When reviewing a large series, a reviewer can reply to some of the
patches with a Reviewed-by tag, stating that they are happy with
that patch in isolation [...]. You should then update those commit
messages by hand to include the Reviewed-by tag, so that in the next
revision, reviewers can spot which patches were already clean from
the previous round.
Regards,
Phil.
