On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, David Gibson wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 03:03:20PM +0100, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, David Gibson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 03:06:38AM +0100, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
To avoid overflow if larger values are added later use ram_addr_t for
the
On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 03:03:20PM +0100, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 03:06:38AM +0100, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
> > > To avoid overflow if larger values are added later use ram_addr_t for
> > > the sdram_bank_sizes parameter to match
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, David Gibson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 03:06:38AM +0100, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
To avoid overflow if larger values are added later use ram_addr_t for
the sdram_bank_sizes parameter to match ram_size to which it is
compared.
So, technically I think these should be
On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 03:06:38AM +0100, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
> To avoid overflow if larger values are added later use ram_addr_t for
> the sdram_bank_sizes parameter to match ram_size to which it is
> compared.
So, technically I think these should be 'hwaddr' (which represents a
guest physical
To avoid overflow if larger values are added later use ram_addr_t for
the sdram_bank_sizes parameter to match ram_size to which it is compared.
Signed-off-by: BALATON Zoltan
---
hw/ppc/ppc440_bamboo.c | 2 +-
hw/ppc/ppc4xx_devs.c| 4 ++--
hw/ppc/sam460ex.c | 2 +-
