On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 16:09:38 +0100
Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote:
> On 01/28/2013 10:59 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 20:28:31 +0100
> > Alexander Graf<ag...@suse.de> wrote:
> >
> >> However, I do agree that this duplicates logic. Cornelia, mind to instead
> >> call our map helper in css_do_tpi?
> > Well, ioinst_handle_tpi() looks like the better place to do this.
> >
> > Can you put this into the series, or should I re-send?
>
> It still breaks for 32-bit targets. Could you please replace the set_bit
> call by normal bit shift operations?
>
Here you are:
From f85a2507c4c5887e308dcd7dfcfebc386d802ea5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.h...@de.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 16:33:04 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] s390: Drop set_bit usage in virtio_ccw.
set_bit on indicators doesn't go well on 32 bit targets:
note: expected 'long unsigned int *' but argument is of type 'uint64_t *'
Switch to bit shifts instead.
Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.h...@de.ibm.com>
---
hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c
index 7d7f336..77e8f32 100644
--- a/hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c
+++ b/hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c
@@ -662,12 +662,12 @@ static void virtio_ccw_notify(DeviceState *d, uint16_t
vector)
if (vector < VIRTIO_PCI_QUEUE_MAX) {
indicators = ldq_phys(dev->indicators);
- set_bit(vector, &indicators);
+ indicators |= 1 << vector;
stq_phys(dev->indicators, indicators);
} else {
vector = 0;
indicators = ldq_phys(dev->indicators2);
- set_bit(vector, &indicators);
+ indicators |= 1 << vector;
stq_phys(dev->indicators2, indicators);
}
--
1.7.6.2
