Mailing List Archive

Switch to unsigned int for the dom0 e820 index. This eliminates the
potential for array underflows, and the compiler might be able to
generate better code.

Requested-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
---
xen/arch/x86/hvm/dom0_build.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/dom0_build.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/dom0_build.c
index d158f4d241..ac71d43a6b 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/dom0_build.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/dom0_build.c
@@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ static paddr_t __init find_kernel_memory(
{
paddr_t kernel_size = elf->dest_size;
unsigned int align;
- int i;
+ unsigned int i;

if ( parms->phys_align != UNSET_ADDR32 )
align = parms->phys_align;
@@ -579,7 +579,7 @@ static paddr_t __init find_kernel_memory(
align = MB(2);

/* Search backwards to find the highest address. */
- for ( i = d->arch.nr_e820 - 1; i >= 0 ; i-- )
+ for ( i = d->arch.nr_e820; i--; )
{
paddr_t start = d->arch.e820[i].addr;
paddr_t end = start + d->arch.e820[i].size;
--
2.44.0