Thanks for the comments Fabiano.
On 05/22/2019 11:38 PM, Fabiano Rosas wrote:
Shivaprasad G Bhat <sb...@linux.ibm.com> writes: ++ ddc = NVDIMM_GET_CLASS(nvdimm); + ddc->read_label_data(nvdimm, &args[0], numBytesToRead, offset); + + return H_SUCCESS; +} + + +static target_ulong h_scm_write_metadata(PowerPCCPU *cpu, + SpaprMachineState *spapr, + target_ulong opcode, + target_ulong *args) +{ + uint32_t drc_index = args[0]; + uint64_t offset = args[1]; + uint64_t data = args[2]; + int8_t numBytesToWrite = args[3];Likewise.
This is supposed to be uint64_t like used in other places. Will fix it in the next version. Rest of the comments I think David has already answered the rational behind the usage to avoid integer overflow.
+ SpaprDrc *drc = spapr_drc_by_index(drc_index); + NVDIMMDevice *nvdimm = NULL; + DeviceState *dev = NULL;
Regards, Shivaprasad
