Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: clarify comments in kani module #5000

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 22, 2025

Conversation

roypat
Copy link
Contributor

@roypat roypat commented Jan 20, 2025

QUEUE_END is the address of the first byte past the end of our queue indeed, but the queue doesnt start at 0 (it starts at QUEUE_BASE_ADDRESS, which is 512), and thus GUEST_MEMORY_SIZE was 512 byte too large, because it assumed QUEUE_END was also the size of the queue.

Closes #4997

Reported-by: Matias Ezequiel Vara Larsen [email protected]

Changes

...

Reason

...

License Acceptance

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under
the terms of the Apache 2.0 license. For more information on following Developer
Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check
CONTRIBUTING.md.

PR Checklist

  • I have read and understand CONTRIBUTING.md.
  • I have run tools/devtool checkstyle to verify that the PR passes the
    automated style checks.
  • I have described what is done in these changes, why they are needed, and
    how they are solving the problem in a clear and encompassing way.
  • I have updated any relevant documentation (both in code and in the docs)
    in the PR.
  • I have mentioned all user-facing changes in CHANGELOG.md.
  • If a specific issue led to this PR, this PR closes the issue.
  • When making API changes, I have followed the
    Runbook for Firecracker API changes.
  • I have tested all new and changed functionalities in unit tests and/or
    integration tests.
  • I have linked an issue to every new TODO.

  • This functionality cannot be added in rust-vmm.

QUEUE_END is the address of the first byte past the end of our queue
indeed, but the queue doesnt start at 0 (it starts at
QUEUE_BASE_ADDRESS, which is 512), and thus GUEST_MEMORY_SIZE was
512 byte too large, because it assumed QUEUE_END was also the size of
the queue.

Closes firecracker-microvm#4997

Reported-by: Matias Ezequiel Vara Larsen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Patrick Roy <[email protected]>
@roypat roypat added the Status: Awaiting review Indicates that a pull request is ready to be reviewed label Jan 20, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 20, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 83.13%. Comparing base (aeb1754) to head (162fb3e).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #5000   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   83.13%   83.13%           
=======================================
  Files         245      245           
  Lines       26697    26697           
=======================================
  Hits        22194    22194           
  Misses       4503     4503           
Flag Coverage Δ
5.10-c5n.metal 83.60% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m5n.metal 83.58% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
5.10-m6a.metal 82.80% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m6g.metal 79.56% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m6i.metal 83.57% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
5.10-m7g.metal 79.56% <ø> (ø)
6.1-c5n.metal 83.59% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m5n.metal 83.58% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m6a.metal 82.80% <ø> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
6.1-m6g.metal 79.56% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m6i.metal 83.58% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m7g.metal 79.55% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@roypat roypat merged commit d28ef60 into firecracker-microvm:main Jan 22, 2025
6 of 7 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Status: Awaiting review Indicates that a pull request is ready to be reviewed
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Misleading comment about where the queue starts and its size
3 participants