On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 04:34:29PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> e820_add_entry() returns an array size on success, or a negative
> value on error.
So what's wrong with int? Does it overflow somehow?
>
> Reviewed-by: Li Qiang <liq3ea@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> hw/i386/pc.c | 2 +-
> include/hw/i386/pc.h | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c
> index ff0f6bbbb3..5a7cffbb1a 100644
> --- a/hw/i386/pc.c
> +++ b/hw/i386/pc.c
> @@ -872,7 +872,7 @@ static void handle_a20_line_change(void *opaque, int irq, int level)
> x86_cpu_set_a20(cpu, level);
> }
>
> -int e820_add_entry(uint64_t address, uint64_t length, uint32_t type)
> +ssize_t e820_add_entry(uint64_t address, uint64_t length, uint32_t type)
> {
> unsigned int index = le32_to_cpu(e820_reserve.count);
> struct e820_entry *entry;
> diff --git a/include/hw/i386/pc.h b/include/hw/i386/pc.h
> index fc29893624..c56116e6f6 100644
> --- a/include/hw/i386/pc.h
> +++ b/include/hw/i386/pc.h
> @@ -289,7 +289,7 @@ void pc_madt_cpu_entry(AcpiDeviceIf *adev, int uid,
> #define E820_NVS 4
> #define E820_UNUSABLE 5
>
> -int e820_add_entry(uint64_t, uint64_t, uint32_t);
> +ssize_t e820_add_entry(uint64_t, uint64_t, uint32_t);
> size_t e820_get_num_entries(void);
> bool e820_get_entry(unsigned int, uint32_t, uint64_t *, uint64_t *);
>
> --
> 2.20.1
