Re: [PULL 06/29] softfloat: Move compare_floats to softfloat-parts.c.inc

[Richard Henderson]

On 3/31/22 12:06, Peter Maydell wrote:
> PS: while you're there, there are also a bunch of new TCG related
> issues where it alleges array indexes being out of bounds. I
> suspect these are false positives, but it's probably faster
> for you to analyse them. (I have a feeling Coverity can get
> confused and claim an error because it's looking at an array
> size it has cached from one target's NB_MMU_MODES value and
> a code flow for a different target with a different NB_MMU_MODES.)

Given the placement of one of the notes,

1760 static void *atomic_mmu_lookup(CPUArchState *env, target_ulong addr,
1761                                MemOpIdx oi, int size, int prot,
1762                                uintptr_t retaddr)
1763 {
        1. assignment: Assigning: mmu_idx = get_mmuidx(oi).
           The value of mmu_idx may now be up to 15.
1764     size_t mmu_idx = get_mmuidx(oi);

the range check in based only on the mask applied within get_mmuidx.
I'll try adding an assert vs NB_MMU_MODES within that function.


r~