On 09/01/2011 03:50 AM, David Gibson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 11:22:18AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 11.08.2011, at 04:36, David Gibson wrote:
[snip]
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_TYPE 0xc000000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_REQUEST 0x4000000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_RESPONSE 0x8000000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_END 0xc000000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_CODE 0x3000000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_SUCCESS 0x0000000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_NOT_FOUND 0x1000000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_PARM 0x2000000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_HW 0x3000000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_RC 0x0c00000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_FLAGS 0x0300000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_ABSOLUTE 0x0000000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_ANDCOND 0x0100000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_AVPN 0x0200000000000000ULL
+#define H_BULK_REMOVE_PTEX 0x00ffffffffffffffULL
indenting looks broken.
Nope, that's intended. The unindented ones are the field masks in the
parameter, the intended ones are the defined values for the
corresponding field.
Interesting :). Makes sense now that you explain it - looked awkward at
first.
+
+static target_ulong h_bulk_remove(CPUState *env, sPAPREnvironment *spapr,
+ target_ulong opcode, target_ulong *args)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i< 4; i++) {
+ target_ulong *tsh =&args[i*2];
+ target_ulong tsl = args[i*2 + 1];
Mind to replace all those magic numbers by something more verbose?
So, "all those" == 2. I can replace the 4 with something I guess, but
changing the 2 would just be silly - that code is just taking the
arguments a pair at a time.
Yup. Thanks! Applied.
Alex
