On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 at 22:15, Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 2/10/23 03:28, Peter Maydell wrote: > > On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 at 00:01, Richard Henderson > > <richard.hender...@linaro.org> wrote: > >> > >> This fixes a bug in which we failed to initialize > >> the result attributes properly after the memset. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> > >> --- > >> target/arm/ptw.c | 13 +------------ > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/target/arm/ptw.c b/target/arm/ptw.c > >> index eaa47f6b62..3205339957 100644 > >> --- a/target/arm/ptw.c > >> +++ b/target/arm/ptw.c > >> @@ -32,12 +32,6 @@ typedef struct S1Translate { > >> void *out_host; > >> } S1Translate; > >> > >> -static bool get_phys_addr_lpae(CPUARMState *env, S1Translate *ptw, > >> - uint64_t address, > >> - MMUAccessType access_type, > >> - GetPhysAddrResult *result, ARMMMUFaultInfo > >> *fi) > >> - __attribute__((nonnull)); > > > > The definition of the function doesn't have the __attribute__, > > so if we drop this forward declaration we need to move the attribute. > > Eh. It was useful as an intermediary during one of the ptw reorgs, but now > that we've > eliminated the use case in which NULL had been passed, it can go away. I > assume you'd > prefer that as a separate patch?
Yes, if we want to deliberately drop the attribute we should do that separately with justification for why it's not needed. thanks -- PMM