On 2012-12-04 11:23, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 4 December 2012 08:11, liguang <lig.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: liguang <lig.f...@cn.fujitsu.com>
>> ---
>> target-i386/cpu.h | 4 ++--
>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/target-i386/cpu.h b/target-i386/cpu.h
>> index 9abec3e..8ca25c8 100644
>> --- a/target-i386/cpu.h
>> +++ b/target-i386/cpu.h
>> @@ -996,9 +996,9 @@ int cpu_x86_handle_mmu_fault(CPUX86State *env,
>> target_ulong addr,
>> #define cpu_handle_mmu_fault cpu_x86_handle_mmu_fault
>> void cpu_x86_set_a20(CPUX86State *env, int a20_state);
>>
>> -static inline int hw_breakpoint_enabled(unsigned long dr7, int index)
>> +static inline bool hw_breakpoint_enabled(unsigned long dr7, int index)
>> {
>> - return (dr7 >> (index * 2)) & 3;
>> + return !!((dr7 >> (index * 2)) & 3);
>> }
>>
>> static inline int hw_breakpoint_type(unsigned long dr7, int index)
>
> Doesn't this break the use of this function in target-i386/seg_helper.c:
>
> if (hw_breakpoint_enabled(env->dr[7], i) == 0x1) {
>
> which specifically wants to determine whether the breakpoint is
> enabled only locally?
It does. And that also indicates the function is misnamed. Something
like hw_breakpoint_state might be better.
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SDP-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
