| Message ID | 20170823083901.852-3-quintela@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
* Juan Quintela (quintela@redhat.com) wrote: > Compiler gets confused with the size of the struct, so move form > g_new0() to g_malloc0(). > > I *think* that the problem is in gcc (or glib for that matter), but > the documentation of the g_new0 states that 1sts first argument is an > struct type, and uint32_t is not an struct type. > > Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> > --- > tests/vmgenid-test.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/tests/vmgenid-test.c b/tests/vmgenid-test.c > index 3d5c1c3615..032e1d465a 100644 > --- a/tests/vmgenid-test.c > +++ b/tests/vmgenid-test.c > @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) > g_assert_cmpint(tables_nr, >, 0); > > /* get the addresses of the tables pointed by rsdt */ > - tables = g_new0(uint32_t, tables_nr); > + tables = g_malloc0(sizeof(uint32_t) * tables_nr); I think there's an easier fix for this I think; try: - g_assert_cmpint(tables_nr, >, 0); + g_assert(tables_nr > 0); Dave > ACPI_READ_ARRAY_PTR(tables, tables_nr, rsdt); > > for (i = 0; i < tables_nr; i++) { > -- > 2.13.5 > -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
On 08/23/2017 01:53 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > * Juan Quintela (quintela@redhat.com) wrote: >> Compiler gets confused with the size of the struct, so move form >> g_new0() to g_malloc0(). >> >> I *think* that the problem is in gcc (or glib for that matter), but >> the documentation of the g_new0 states that 1sts first argument is an >> struct type, and uint32_t is not an struct type. >> >> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> >> --- >> tests/vmgenid-test.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/tests/vmgenid-test.c b/tests/vmgenid-test.c >> index 3d5c1c3615..032e1d465a 100644 >> --- a/tests/vmgenid-test.c >> +++ b/tests/vmgenid-test.c >> @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) >> g_assert_cmpint(tables_nr, >, 0); >> >> /* get the addresses of the tables pointed by rsdt */ >> - tables = g_new0(uint32_t, tables_nr); >> + tables = g_malloc0(sizeof(uint32_t) * tables_nr); > > I think there's an easier fix for this I think; > try: > > - g_assert_cmpint(tables_nr, >, 0); > + g_assert(tables_nr > 0); I fixed that one with : @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) AcpiRsdpDescriptor rsdp_table; uint32_t rsdt; AcpiRsdtDescriptorRev1 rsdt_table; - int tables_nr; + uint32_t tables_nr; uint32_t *tables; AcpiTableHeader ssdt_table; VgidTable vgid_table; C. > Dave > >> ACPI_READ_ARRAY_PTR(tables, tables_nr, rsdt); >> >> for (i = 0; i < tables_nr; i++) { >> -- >> 2.13.5 >> > -- > Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK >
On 08/28/2017 09:41 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > On 08/23/2017 01:53 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: >> * Juan Quintela (quintela@redhat.com) wrote: >>> Compiler gets confused with the size of the struct, so move form >>> g_new0() to g_malloc0(). >>> >>> I *think* that the problem is in gcc (or glib for that matter), but >>> the documentation of the g_new0 states that 1sts first argument is an >>> struct type, and uint32_t is not an struct type. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> >>> /* get the addresses of the tables pointed by rsdt */ >>> - tables = g_new0(uint32_t, tables_nr); >>> + tables = g_malloc0(sizeof(uint32_t) * tables_nr); >> > I fixed that one with : > > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) > AcpiRsdpDescriptor rsdp_table; > uint32_t rsdt; > AcpiRsdtDescriptorRev1 rsdt_table; > - int tables_nr; > + uint32_t tables_nr; I like this one better (multiplication in g_malloc0() makes me worry about overflow; using unsigned math to avoid the problem is nicer). Are we going to see a v2 of this patch series?
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 03:17:25PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > On 08/28/2017 09:41 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > > On 08/23/2017 01:53 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > >> * Juan Quintela (quintela@redhat.com) wrote: > >>> Compiler gets confused with the size of the struct, so move form > >>> g_new0() to g_malloc0(). > >>> > >>> I *think* that the problem is in gcc (or glib for that matter), but > >>> the documentation of the g_new0 states that 1sts first argument is an > >>> struct type, and uint32_t is not an struct type. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> > >>> --- > > >>> > >>> /* get the addresses of the tables pointed by rsdt */ > >>> - tables = g_new0(uint32_t, tables_nr); > >>> + tables = g_malloc0(sizeof(uint32_t) * tables_nr); > >> > > > I fixed that one with : > > > > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) > > AcpiRsdpDescriptor rsdp_table; > > uint32_t rsdt; > > AcpiRsdtDescriptorRev1 rsdt_table; > > - int tables_nr; > > + uint32_t tables_nr; > > I like this one better (multiplication in g_malloc0() makes me worry > about overflow; using unsigned math to avoid the problem is nicer). Are > we going to see a v2 of this patch series? It should really be size_t, because it is assigned from the result of a size_t calculation, but you then also need to change a later assert which was relying on it being signed: @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) AcpiRsdpDescriptor rsdp_table; uint32_t rsdt; AcpiRsdtDescriptorRev1 rsdt_table; - int tables_nr; + size_t tables_nr; uint32_t *tables; AcpiTableHeader ssdt_table; VgidTable vgid_table; @@ -62,9 +62,9 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) ACPI_ASSERT_CMP(rsdt_table.signature, "RSDT"); /* compute the table entries in rsdt */ + g_assert_cmpint(rsdt_table.length, >, sizeof(AcpiRsdtDescriptorRev1)); tables_nr = (rsdt_table.length - sizeof(AcpiRsdtDescriptorRev1)) / sizeof(uint32_t); - g_assert_cmpint(tables_nr, >, 0); /* get the addresses of the tables pointed by rsdt */ tables = g_new0(uint32_t, tables_nr); Regards, Daniel
Cedric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org> wrote: > On 08/23/2017 01:53 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: >> * Juan Quintela (quintela@redhat.com) wrote: >>> Compiler gets confused with the size of the struct, so move form >>> g_new0() to g_malloc0(). >>> >>> I *think* that the problem is in gcc (or glib for that matter), but >>> the documentation of the g_new0 states that 1sts first argument is an >>> struct type, and uint32_t is not an struct type. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> tests/vmgenid-test.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/tests/vmgenid-test.c b/tests/vmgenid-test.c >>> index 3d5c1c3615..032e1d465a 100644 >>> --- a/tests/vmgenid-test.c >>> +++ b/tests/vmgenid-test.c >>> @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) >>> g_assert_cmpint(tables_nr, >, 0); >>> >>> /* get the addresses of the tables pointed by rsdt */ >>> - tables = g_new0(uint32_t, tables_nr); >>> + tables = g_malloc0(sizeof(uint32_t) * tables_nr); >> >> I think there's an easier fix for this I think; >> try: >> >> - g_assert_cmpint(tables_nr, >, 0); >> + g_assert(tables_nr > 0); I liked more the following one. > > I fixed that one with : > > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) > AcpiRsdpDescriptor rsdp_table; > uint32_t rsdt; > AcpiRsdtDescriptorRev1 rsdt_table; > - int tables_nr; > + uint32_t tables_nr; > uint32_t *tables; > AcpiTableHeader ssdt_table; > VgidTable vgid_table; This make things work for me, so moving to this one. Thanks, Juan.
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:51:23PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote: > Cedric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org> wrote: > > On 08/23/2017 01:53 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > >> * Juan Quintela (quintela@redhat.com) wrote: > >>> Compiler gets confused with the size of the struct, so move form > >>> g_new0() to g_malloc0(). > >>> > >>> I *think* that the problem is in gcc (or glib for that matter), but > >>> the documentation of the g_new0 states that 1sts first argument is an > >>> struct type, and uint32_t is not an struct type. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> > >>> --- > >>> tests/vmgenid-test.c | 2 +- > >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/tests/vmgenid-test.c b/tests/vmgenid-test.c > >>> index 3d5c1c3615..032e1d465a 100644 > >>> --- a/tests/vmgenid-test.c > >>> +++ b/tests/vmgenid-test.c > >>> @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) > >>> g_assert_cmpint(tables_nr, >, 0); > >>> > >>> /* get the addresses of the tables pointed by rsdt */ > >>> - tables = g_new0(uint32_t, tables_nr); > >>> + tables = g_malloc0(sizeof(uint32_t) * tables_nr); > >> > >> I think there's an easier fix for this I think; > >> try: > >> > >> - g_assert_cmpint(tables_nr, >, 0); > >> + g_assert(tables_nr > 0); > > I liked more the following one. > > > > > > I fixed that one with : > > > > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) > > AcpiRsdpDescriptor rsdp_table; > > uint32_t rsdt; > > AcpiRsdtDescriptorRev1 rsdt_table; > > - int tables_nr; > > + uint32_t tables_nr; > > uint32_t *tables; > > AcpiTableHeader ssdt_table; > > VgidTable vgid_table; > > > This make things work for me, so moving to this one. It should be size_t, because its taking the result of a calculation that is size_t. You also need to change the assert I mention in my other email. Regards, Daniel
"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 03:17:25PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: >> On 08/28/2017 09:41 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote: >> > On 08/23/2017 01:53 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: >> >> * Juan Quintela (quintela@redhat.com) wrote: >> >>> Compiler gets confused with the size of the struct, so move form >> >>> g_new0() to g_malloc0(). >> >>> >> >>> I *think* that the problem is in gcc (or glib for that matter), but >> >>> the documentation of the g_new0 states that 1sts first argument is an >> >>> struct type, and uint32_t is not an struct type. >> >>> >> >>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> >> >>> --- >> >> >>> >> >>> /* get the addresses of the tables pointed by rsdt */ >> >>> - tables = g_new0(uint32_t, tables_nr); >> >>> + tables = g_malloc0(sizeof(uint32_t) * tables_nr); >> >> >> >> > I fixed that one with : >> > >> > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) >> > AcpiRsdpDescriptor rsdp_table; >> > uint32_t rsdt; >> > AcpiRsdtDescriptorRev1 rsdt_table; >> > - int tables_nr; >> > + uint32_t tables_nr; >> >> I like this one better (multiplication in g_malloc0() makes me worry >> about overflow; using unsigned math to avoid the problem is nicer). Are >> we going to see a v2 of this patch series? > > It should really be size_t, because it is assigned from the result of > a size_t calculation, but you then also need to change a later assert > which was relying on it being signed: > > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) > AcpiRsdpDescriptor rsdp_table; > uint32_t rsdt; > AcpiRsdtDescriptorRev1 rsdt_table; > - int tables_nr; > + size_t tables_nr; I was using this already. > uint32_t *tables; > AcpiTableHeader ssdt_table; > VgidTable vgid_table; > @@ -62,9 +62,9 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) > ACPI_ASSERT_CMP(rsdt_table.signature, "RSDT"); > > /* compute the table entries in rsdt */ > + g_assert_cmpint(rsdt_table.length, >, sizeof(AcpiRsdtDescriptorRev1)); > tables_nr = (rsdt_table.length - sizeof(AcpiRsdtDescriptorRev1)) / > sizeof(uint32_t); > - g_assert_cmpint(tables_nr, >, 0); > > /* get the addresses of the tables pointed by rsdt */ > tables = g_new0(uint32_t, tables_nr); > And here we are, this mail arrived after I sent my new series. Will wait for more comments and resend later. Thanks, Juan.
diff --git a/tests/vmgenid-test.c b/tests/vmgenid-test.c index 3d5c1c3615..032e1d465a 100644 --- a/tests/vmgenid-test.c +++ b/tests/vmgenid-test.c @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ static uint32_t acpi_find_vgia(void) g_assert_cmpint(tables_nr, >, 0); /* get the addresses of the tables pointed by rsdt */ - tables = g_new0(uint32_t, tables_nr); + tables = g_malloc0(sizeof(uint32_t) * tables_nr); ACPI_READ_ARRAY_PTR(tables, tables_nr, rsdt); for (i = 0; i < tables_nr; i++) {
Compiler gets confused with the size of the struct, so move form g_new0() to g_malloc0(). I *think* that the problem is in gcc (or glib for that matter), but the documentation of the g_new0 states that 1sts first argument is an struct type, and uint32_t is not an struct type. Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> --- tests/vmgenid-test.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)