>>> On 19.01.16 at 06:57, <czy...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote: > Fix CID 1343302 by adding checking a check on the value of reg_shift. > This patch also rolls the multiplication by 8 into the shift. > No functional changes. > > Suggested-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
I don't think so. > Signed-off-by: Chester Lin <czy...@uwaterloo.ca> > --- > xen/drivers/char/ns16550.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/xen/drivers/char/ns16550.c b/xen/drivers/char/ns16550.c > index bc24015..55cfc45 100644 > --- a/xen/drivers/char/ns16550.c > +++ b/xen/drivers/char/ns16550.c > @@ -913,7 +913,8 @@ pci_uart_config(struct ns16550 *uart, bool_t skip_amt, > unsigned int bar_idx) > * Force length of mmio region to be at least > * 8 bytes times (1 << reg_shift) > */ > - if ( size < (0x8 * (1 << uart_param[p].reg_shift)) ) > + if ( uart_param[p].reg_shift > 27 || > + size < (1 << (uart_param[p].reg_shift + 3)) ) > continue; Instead I think Coverity complaining is mad, and adding a comparison here just clutters the code. The only thing I could imagine I might have suggested would be to put an ASSERT() here. In any event should is the replacement of the multiplication by an addition not what I think I had also mentioned before: The expression, if changed in the first place, should use 8 as the left operand of the shift. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
