Commit
eb7eeb8 ("memory: split address_space_read and
address_space_write", 2015-12-17) made address_space_rw
dispatch to one of address_space_read or address_space_write,
rather than vice versa.
For callers of address_space_read and address_space_write this
causes false positive defects when Coverity sees a length-8 write in
address_space_read and a length-4 (e.g. int*) buffer to read into.
As long as the size of the buffer is okay, this is a false positive.
Reflect the code change into the model.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <
20170315081641.20588-1-pbonzini@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
int last = buf[len-1];
}
-MemTxResult address_space_rw(AddressSpace *as, hwaddr addr, MemTxAttrs attrs,
- uint8_t *buf, int len, bool is_write)
+MemTxResult address_space_read(AddressSpace *as, hwaddr addr,
+ MemTxAttrs attrs,
+ uint8_t *buf, int len)
{
MemTxResult result;
-
// TODO: investigate impact of treating reads as producing
// tainted data, with __coverity_tainted_data_argument__(buf).
- if (is_write) __bufread(buf, len); else __bufwrite(buf, len);
+ __bufwrite(buf, len);
+ return result;
+}
+MemTxResult address_space_write(AddressSpace *as, hwaddr addr,
+ MemTxAttrs attrs,
+ const uint8_t *buf, int len)
+{
+ MemTxResult result;
+ __bufread(buf, len);
return result;
}
+
/* Tainting */
typedef struct {} name2keysym_t;