| Message ID | 20090723085216.GA10799@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:52:16AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > When updating irq routing entries, we should memcpy the new entry > over the old one. Current code gets it wrong, and only works because > it's uncommon for guests to change tables. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> Applied, thanks. > --- > > Changes since v1: > updated irqchip case as well > > qemu-kvm.c | 4 ++-- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/qemu-kvm.c b/qemu-kvm.c > index 60e5eac..b4de9c6 100644 > --- a/qemu-kvm.c > +++ b/qemu-kvm.c > @@ -1544,7 +1544,7 @@ int kvm_update_routing_entry(kvm_context_t kvm, > case KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_IRQCHIP: > if (e->u.irqchip.irqchip == entry->u.irqchip.irqchip && > e->u.irqchip.pin == entry->u.irqchip.pin) { > - memcpy(&e->u.irqchip, &entry->u.irqchip, sizeof e->u.irqchip); > + memcpy(&e->u.irqchip, &newentry->u.irqchip, sizeof e->u.irqchip); > return 0; > } > break; > @@ -1552,7 +1552,7 @@ int kvm_update_routing_entry(kvm_context_t kvm, > if (e->u.msi.address_lo == entry->u.msi.address_lo && > e->u.msi.address_hi == entry->u.msi.address_hi && > e->u.msi.data == entry->u.msi.data) { > - memcpy(&e->u.msi, &entry->u.msi, sizeof e->u.msi); > + memcpy(&e->u.msi, &newentry->u.msi, sizeof e->u.msi); > return 0; > } > break; > -- > 1.6.2.5 > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/qemu-kvm.c b/qemu-kvm.c index 60e5eac..b4de9c6 100644 --- a/qemu-kvm.c +++ b/qemu-kvm.c @@ -1544,7 +1544,7 @@ int kvm_update_routing_entry(kvm_context_t kvm, case KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_IRQCHIP: if (e->u.irqchip.irqchip == entry->u.irqchip.irqchip && e->u.irqchip.pin == entry->u.irqchip.pin) { - memcpy(&e->u.irqchip, &entry->u.irqchip, sizeof e->u.irqchip); + memcpy(&e->u.irqchip, &newentry->u.irqchip, sizeof e->u.irqchip); return 0; } break; @@ -1552,7 +1552,7 @@ int kvm_update_routing_entry(kvm_context_t kvm, if (e->u.msi.address_lo == entry->u.msi.address_lo && e->u.msi.address_hi == entry->u.msi.address_hi && e->u.msi.data == entry->u.msi.data) { - memcpy(&e->u.msi, &entry->u.msi, sizeof e->u.msi); + memcpy(&e->u.msi, &newentry->u.msi, sizeof e->u.msi); return 0; } break;
When updating irq routing entries, we should memcpy the new entry over the old one. Current code gets it wrong, and only works because it's uncommon for guests to change tables. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- Changes since v1: updated irqchip case as well qemu-kvm.c | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)