> This is rewritten later, why bother setting this here?
>
>>
>>
>> -dma_memory_read(&address_space_memory, entry_addr + 2,
>> -(uint8_t *)(&dscr->length), 2);
>> -dscr->length = le16_to_cpu(dscr->length);
>> +dscr->length = lduw_le_dma(&address_s
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Alistair Francis
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
>> wrote:
>>> This makes the code slightly safer, also easier to review.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Alistair Francis
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
> wrote:
>> This makes the code slightly safer, also easier to review.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
>> ---
>> hw/sd/sdhci.c | 23 +++
>> 1 file
On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
wrote:
> This makes the code slightly safer, also easier to review.
>
> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
> ---
> hw/sd/sdhci.c | 23 +++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/sd/sdh
This makes the code slightly safer, also easier to review.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
hw/sd/sdhci.c | 23 +++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/sd/sdhci.c b/hw/sd/sdhci.c
index 312b167bfa..e39623baba 100644
--- a/hw/sd/sdhci.c
++
