On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 at 11:44, Stafford Horne wrote:
> As for the patch.
>
> Acked-by: Stafford Horne
Thanks; I'll take this via target-arm.next since I'm putting
together a pullreq at the moment.
-- PMM
On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 10:37:17AM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 at 07:10, Stafford Horne wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 11:46:54AM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > > In the mtspr helper we attempt to check for "is the timer disabled"
> > > with "if (env->ttmr & TIMER_NON
On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 at 07:10, Stafford Horne wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 11:46:54AM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > In the mtspr helper we attempt to check for "is the timer disabled"
> > with "if (env->ttmr & TIMER_NONE)". This is wrong because TIMER_NONE
> > is zero and the condition is a
On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 11:46:54AM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> In the mtspr helper we attempt to check for "is the timer disabled"
> with "if (env->ttmr & TIMER_NONE)". This is wrong because TIMER_NONE
> is zero and the condition is always false (Coverity complains about
> the dead code.)
>
> T
In the mtspr helper we attempt to check for "is the timer disabled"
with "if (env->ttmr & TIMER_NONE)". This is wrong because TIMER_NONE
is zero and the condition is always false (Coverity complains about
the dead code.)
The correct check would be to test whether the TTMR_M field in the
register
