Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 0/7] qapi/range/memory-device: fixes and cleanups

[Eduardo Habkost]

On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 11:14:48AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 23.10.18 17:22, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > While working on memory device code, I noticed that specifiying an uint64_t
> > on command line does not work in all cases as we always parse an int64_t.
> > So I fix that and also cleanup the old int64_t parser.
> > 
> > To be able to fix some overflows in memory-device code in a clean way,
> > I am reusing the range implementation of qemu, for which I need some
> > more helpers.
> > 
> > This series is based on
> >     "[PATCH v5 00/16] memory-device: complete refactoring"
> > which should get pulled soon.
> > 
> > v2 -> v3:
> > - "qapi: correctly parse uint64_t values from strings"
> > -- don't parse range
> > -- don't rename "parse_str"
> > 
> > v1 -> v2:
> > - "range: add some more functions"
> > -- Reduce number of functions
> > -- make range_init() return an error in case of overflow
> > -- provide range_init_nofail()
> > - "memory-device: rewrite address assignment using ranges"
> > -- Use new functions range_init/range_init_nofail
> > -- Use range_contains_range instead of starts_before/ends_after
> > 
> > 
> > David Hildenbrand (7):
> >   qapi: use qemu_strtoi64() in parse_str
> >   qapi: correctly parse uint64_t values from strings
> >   range: pass const pointer where possible
> >   range: add some more functions
> >   memory-device: use QEMU_IS_ALIGNED
> >   memory-device: avoid overflows on very huge devices
> >   memory-device: rewrite address assignment using ranges
> > 
> >  hw/mem/memory-device.c      | 60 ++++++++++++++++++--------------
> >  include/qemu/range.h        | 68 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >  qapi/string-input-visitor.c | 34 ++++++++-----------
> >  3 files changed, 114 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
> > 
> 
> Any more comments? If not, I think this is good to go.

I'm assuming you want to drop patches 1 and 2, that's correct?

I'm queueing patches 3/7, 5/7, and 6/7 on machine-next.

Patch 4/7 still needs a reviewer.

Patch 7/7 seems to depend on patch 4, so I'm not queueing it yet.

-- 
Eduardo