qemu-trivial
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH] memory: fix a bug of detection of memory regi


From: Stefan Hajnoczi
Subject: Re: [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH] memory: fix a bug of detection of memory region collision
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 13:22:27 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 02:32:01PM +0800, Hu Tao wrote:
> The collision reports before and after this patch are:
> 
> before:
> 
> warning: subregion collision cfc/4 (pci-conf-data) vs cf8/4 (pci-conf-idx)
> warning: subregion collision 8000000/f8000000 (pci-hole) vs 0/8000000 
> (ram-below-4g)
> warning: subregion collision 100000000/4000000000000000 (pci-hole64) vs 
> 8000000/f8000000 (pci-hole)
> warning: subregion collision 4d1/1 (kvm-elcr) vs 4d0/1 (kvm-elcr)
> warning: subregion collision fec00000/1000 (kvm-ioapic) vs 8000000/f8000000 
> (pci-hole)
> warning: subregion collision 80/1 (ioport80) vs 7e/2 (kvmvapic)
> warning: subregion collision fed00000/400 (hpet) vs 8000000/f8000000 
> (pci-hole)
> warning: subregion collision 81/3 (dma-page) vs 80/1 (ioport80)
> warning: subregion collision 8/8 (dma-cont) vs 0/8 (dma-chan)
> warning: subregion collision d0/10 (dma-cont) vs c0/10 (dma-chan)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 8/8 (dma-cont)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 0/8 (dma-chan)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 64/1 (i8042-cmd)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 60/1 (i8042-data)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 61/1 (elcr)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 40/4 (kvm-pit)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 70/2 (rtc)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 20/2 (kvm-pic)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 7e/2 (kvmvapic)
> warning: subregion collision 4/2 (acpi-cnt) vs 0/4 (acpi-evt)
> warning: subregion collision 30/8 (apci-smi) vs 20/10 (apci-gpe0)
> warning: subregion collision b0000000/10000000 (pcie-mmcfg) vs 
> 8000000/f8000000 (pci-hole)
> 
> after:
> 
> warning: subregion collision fec00000/1000 (kvm-ioapic) vs 8000000/f8000000 
> (pci-hole)
> warning: subregion collision fed00000/400 (hpet) vs 8000000/f8000000 
> (pci-hole)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 8/8 (dma-cont)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 0/8 (dma-chan)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 64/1 (i8042-cmd)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 60/1 (i8042-data)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 61/1 (elcr)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 40/4 (kvm-pit)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 70/2 (rtc)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 20/2 (kvm-pic)
> warning: subregion collision 0/80 (ich9-pm) vs 7e/2 (kvmvapic)
> warning: subregion collision b0000000/10000000 (pcie-mmcfg) vs 
> 8000000/f8000000 (pci-hole)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hu Tao <address@hidden>
> ---
>  memory.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

The int128_le() comparison below suggests that int128_gt() really should
be int128_ge().

Thanks, applied to the trivial patches tree:
https://github.com/stefanha/qemu/commits/trivial-patches

Stefan



reply via email to

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