Hi Arnaldo,
On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 02:29:44PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 09:58:55AM +0800, Leo Yan escreveu:
> > On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 01:46:41PM -0700, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > > On Sat, Feb 06, 2021 at 11:08:29PM +0800, Leo Yan wrote:
> > > > From: Suzu
Em Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 09:58:55AM +0800, Leo Yan escreveu:
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 01:46:41PM -0700, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 06, 2021 at 11:08:29PM +0800, Leo Yan wrote:
> > > From: Suzuki K Poulose
> > >
> > > When set option with macros ETM_OPT_CTXTID and ETM_OPT_TS, it wrongl
On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 01:46:41PM -0700, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 06, 2021 at 11:08:29PM +0800, Leo Yan wrote:
> > From: Suzuki K Poulose
> >
> > When set option with macros ETM_OPT_CTXTID and ETM_OPT_TS, it wrongly
> > takes these two values (14 and 28 prespectively) as bit masks, b
On Sat, Feb 06, 2021 at 11:08:29PM +0800, Leo Yan wrote:
> From: Suzuki K Poulose
>
> When set option with macros ETM_OPT_CTXTID and ETM_OPT_TS, it wrongly
> takes these two values (14 and 28 prespectively) as bit masks, but
> actually both are the offset for bits. But this doesn't lead to
> fur
From: Suzuki K Poulose
When set option with macros ETM_OPT_CTXTID and ETM_OPT_TS, it wrongly
takes these two values (14 and 28 prespectively) as bit masks, but
actually both are the offset for bits. But this doesn't lead to
further failure due to the AND logic operation will be always true for
E
5 matches
Mail list logo