>From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com] >Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 7:37 AM > >>>> On 14.07.15 at 02:14, <edmund.h.wh...@intel.com> wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Ed White <edmund.h.wh...@intel.com> >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c >> @@ -6443,6 +6443,148 @@ long do_hvm_op(unsigned long op, >XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg) >> break; >> } >> >> + case HVMOP_altp2m: >> + { >> + struct xen_hvm_altp2m_op a; >> + struct domain *d = NULL; >> + >> + if ( copy_from_guest(&a, arg, 1) ) >> + return -EFAULT; >> + >> + if ( a.pad[0] || a.pad[1] ) >> + return -EINVAL; > >Why can't the field be uint16_t, making this a single check? >
Could be of course; we had asked for an example and we found domctl, which pads with uint8_t[] and followed the same approach. Change required? Ravi >Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
