Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Oct 2014 07:04:22 -0700 | From | Martin Kelly <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] xen/setup: add paranoid index check and warning |
| |
On 10/14/2014 02:22 AM, David Vrabel wrote: > On 14/10/14 02:19, Martin Kelly wrote: >> In a call to set_phys_range_identity, i-1 is used without checking that >> i is non-zero. Although unlikely, a bug in the code before it could >> cause the value to be 0, leading to erroneous behavior. This patch adds >> a check against 0 value and a corresponding warning. > > This can only happen if the toolstack supplies a memory map with zero > entries. I could see justification for adding a panic at the top of > this function in this case, but I can't see the usefulness of this warning. >
Yes, a panic is probably appropriate. What do you think about the relative merits of panicing in the callers vs. in the sanitize_e820_map function itself (thus to avoid a bunch of similar error checks in the callers)?
| |