On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 08:26:51AM +0100, Alex Benn�e wrote:
>
> Edgar E. Iglesias writes:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 11:41:25AM +0100, Alex Benn?e wrote:
> >>
> >> Edgar E. Iglesias writes:
> >> > static inline void arm_log_exception(int idx)
> >> > @@ -204,6 +205,11 @@ static inline uint32_t syn_aa64_svc(uint32_t imm16)
> >> > return (EC_AA64_SVC << ARM_EL_EC_SHIFT) | ARM_EL_IL | (imm16 &
> >> > 0xffff);
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > +static inline uint32_t syn_aa64_hvc(uint32_t imm16)
> >> > +{
> >> > + return (EC_AA64_HVC << ARM_EL_EC_SHIFT) | ARM_EL_IL | (imm16 &
> >> > 0xffff);
> >> > +}
> >>
> >> The mask seems superfluous (as it is for arm_log_exception)
> >
> > Sorry, can you clarify what you mean here? Are you refering to the imm16?
>
> Yes the imm16. It's the result of an extract32(..,..,16) so I can't see
> how it wouldn't already be correctly masked.
Right, so my first version here had a uint16_t imm16, but I changed
it to keep it consistent with the other functions. I'm happy to
change things to match their use with additional patches. I'll do
something for v2.
