Hey guys,
I can't remember details about this particular work which has been done
more than decade ago, but I guess that these uint32_t variables reflect the
architectural state of the HW, so if it might overflow over time, there is
high probability that this is what was architecturally going to ha
+Evgeny
On 8/11/24 16:47, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 at 08:38, Dmitry Frolov wrote:
The product "icnto * s->tcntb" may overflow uint32_t.
Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with SVACE.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Frolov
---
hw/timer/exynos4210_mct.c | 2 +-
1 f
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 at 08:38, Dmitry Frolov wrote:
>
> The product "icnto * s->tcntb" may overflow uint32_t.
>
> Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with SVACE.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Frolov
> ---
> hw/timer/exynos4210_mct.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletio
The product "icnto * s->tcntb" may overflow uint32_t.
Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with SVACE.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Frolov
---
hw/timer/exynos4210_mct.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/hw/timer/exynos4210_mct.c b/hw/timer/exynos4210_
