On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 11:52:36 +0000 Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote:
> Hi; Coverity spots that if hw/acpi/pcihp.c:acpi_pcihp_eject_slot() > is passed a zero 'slots' argument then ctz32(slots) will return 32, > and then the code that does '1U << slot' is C undefined behaviour > because it's an oversized shift. (This is CID 1421896.) > > Since the pci_write() function in this file can call > acpi_pcihp_eject_slot() with an arbitrary value from the guest, > I think we need to handle 'slots == 0' safely. But what should > the behaviour be? 0 is not valid value, we should ignore and return early in this case like we do with bsel. I'll post a path shortly. > > thanks > -- PMM >
