On Mon, 12 Oct 2020, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org>
The PCI_ADDR() macro use generic PCI fields shifted by 8-bit.
Rewrite it extracting the shift operation one layer.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org>
---
hw/pci-host/bonito.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/pci-host/bonito.c b/hw/pci-host/bonito.c
index a99eced0657..abb3ee86769 100644
--- a/hw/pci-host/bonito.c
+++ b/hw/pci-host/bonito.c
@@ -196,8 +196,8 @@ FIELD(BONGENCFG, PCIQUEUE, 12, 1)
#define PCI_IDSEL_VIA686B (1 << PCI_IDSEL_VIA686B_BIT)
#define PCI_ADDR(busno , devno , funno , regno) \
- ((((busno) << 16) & 0xff0000) + (((devno) << 11) & 0xf800) + \
- (((funno) << 8) & 0x700) + (regno))
+ ((((busno) << 8) & 0xff00) + (((devno) << 3) & 0xf8) + \
+ (((funno) & 0x7) << 8) + (regno))
Are you missing a << 8 somewhere before + (regno) or both of these are
equally unreadable and I've missed something? This seems to be completely
replaced by next patch so what's the point of this change?
Regards,
BALATON Zoltan
typedef struct BonitoState BonitoState;
