qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL v2 00/49] pci, pc, virtio: fixes, features


From: Peter Maydell
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL v2 00/49] pci, pc, virtio: fixes, features
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 14:25:16 +0000

On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 14:19, Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 02:07:32PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 13:44, Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > Oh. I am pretty sure it's endian-ness :(
> > >
> > > Any chance you can quickly test the below?
> > >
> > > That would be appreciated ...
> > >
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tests/bios-tables-test.c b/tests/bios-tables-test.c
> > > index 0bf7164590..a506dcbb29 100644
> > > --- a/tests/bios-tables-test.c
> > > +++ b/tests/bios-tables-test.c
> > > @@ -274,6 +274,7 @@ static GArray *load_expected_aml(test_data *data)
> > >      AcpiSdtTable *sdt;
> > >      GError *error = NULL;
> > >      gboolean ret;
> > > +    gsize aml_len;
> > >
> > >      GArray *exp_tables = g_array_new(false, true, sizeof(AcpiSdtTable));
> > >      if (getenv("V")) {
> > > @@ -307,7 +308,8 @@ try_again:
> > >              fprintf(stderr, "Using expected file '%s'\n", aml_file);
> > >          }
> > >          ret = g_file_get_contents(aml_file, (gchar **)&exp_sdt.aml,
> > > -                                  (gsize *)&exp_sdt.aml_len, &error);
> > > +                                  &aml_len, &error);
> > > +        exp_sdt.aml_len = aml_len;
> > >          g_assert(ret);
> > >          g_assert_no_error(error);
> > >          g_assert(exp_sdt.aml);
> >
> >
> > I can test that once I've finished processing the other pullreq
> > I'm currently testing... That's not so much an endianness issue
> > as trying to fit a 64-bit value into a 32-bit field, though.
> > That cast in the code that is fixed here is an indication of
> > the bug :-)

> Right but it fits on LE.

It still doesn't fit, you just don't notice that you've blown
away the following item in the struct. Anyway I'm currently
running the test, which I agree ought to fix things.

thanks
-- PMM



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]