From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julien Grall Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/6] xen/arm: observe itargets setting in vgic_enable_irqs and vgic_disable_irqs Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:57:58 +0100 Message-ID: <539DC286.3070508@linaro.org> References: <1402504032-13267-3-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> <539976D0.4050305@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: julien.grall@citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Ian.Campbell@citrix.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 12/06/14 15:42, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> + tr = (1 << v->domain->max_vcpus) - 1; >>> + tr = tr | (tr << 8) | (tr << 16) | (tr << 24); >>> + tr &= *r; >>> + /* ignore zero writes */ >>> + if ( !tr ) >>> + goto write_ignore; >>> + if ( dabt.size == 2 && >>> + !((tr & 0xff) && (tr & (0xff << 8)) && >>> + (tr & (0xff << 16)) && (tr & (0xff << 24)))) >>> + goto write_ignore; >> >> I quite difficult to understand this check. Does this check is only for >> word-access? > > The previous test covers byte-access after the change of the following > patch. I should move it to this patch to make it clearer. Yes please. Regards, -- Julien Grall