On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 2:53 PM Ravi Bangoria
wrote:
>
> Milton Miller reported that we are aligning start and end address to
> wrong size SZ_512M. It should be SZ_512. Fix that.
>
> While doing this change I also found a case where ALIGN() comparison
> fails. Within a given aligned range, ALIGN()
Le 08/07/2020 à 09:44, Jordan Niethe a écrit :
On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 2:53 PM Ravi Bangoria
wrote:
Milton Miller reported that we are aligning start and end address to
wrong size SZ_512M. It should be SZ_512. Fix that.
While doing this change I also found a case where ALIGN() comparison
On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 2:53 PM Ravi Bangoria
wrote:
>
> Milton Miller reported that we are aligning start and end address to
> wrong size SZ_512M. It should be SZ_512. Fix that.
>
> While doing this change I also found a case where ALIGN() comparison
> fails. Within a given aligned range, ALIGN()
Milton Miller reported that we are aligning start and end address to
wrong size SZ_512M. It should be SZ_512. Fix that.
While doing this change I also found a case where ALIGN() comparison
fails. Within a given aligned range, ALIGN() of two addresses does not
match when start address is pointing