On 05/10/2018 08:28 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 08/05/2018 23:27, Eric Blake wrote:
Detected by Coverity: Multiplying two 32-bit int and assigning
the result to a 64-bit number is a risk of overflow. Prior to
the conversion to byte-based interfaces, the block layer took
care of ensuring that a
On 08/05/2018 23:27, Eric Blake wrote:
> Detected by Coverity: Multiplying two 32-bit int and assigning
> the result to a 64-bit number is a risk of overflow. Prior to
> the conversion to byte-based interfaces, the block layer took
> care of ensuring that a status request never exceeded 2G in
>
On 05/08/2018 06:27 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> Detected by Coverity: Multiplying two 32-bit int and assigning
> the result to a 64-bit number is a risk of overflow. Prior to
> the conversion to byte-based interfaces, the block layer took
> care of ensuring that a status request never exceeded 2G in
Detected by Coverity: Multiplying two 32-bit int and assigning
the result to a 64-bit number is a risk of overflow. Prior to
the conversion to byte-based interfaces, the block layer took
care of ensuring that a status request never exceeded 2G in
the driver; but after that conversion, the block
