On 6 June 2015 at 00:18, Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwa...@xilinx.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 5:09 AM, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>
> wrote:
>> The pxa2xx-ssp device is already a QOM device but is still
>> using the old-style register_savevm(); convert to VMState.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>
>> ---
>> hw/arm/pxa2xx.c | 89
>> +++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------------
>> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/arm/pxa2xx.c b/hw/arm/pxa2xx.c
>> index 770902f..09401f9 100644
>> --- a/hw/arm/pxa2xx.c
>> +++ b/hw/arm/pxa2xx.c
>> @@ -457,7 +457,7 @@ typedef struct {
>>
>> MemoryRegion iomem;
>> qemu_irq irq;
>> - int enable;
>> + uint32_t enable;
>> SSIBus *bus;
>>
>> uint32_t sscr[2];
>> @@ -470,10 +470,39 @@ typedef struct {
>> uint8_t ssacd;
>>
>> uint32_t rx_fifo[16];
>> - int rx_level;
>> - int rx_start;
>> + uint32_t rx_level;
>> + uint32_t rx_start;
>> } PXA2xxSSPState;
>>
>> +static bool pxa2xx_ssp_vmstate_validate(void *opaque, int version_id)
>> +{
>> + PXA2xxSSPState *s = opaque;
>> +
>> + return s->rx_start < sizeof(s->rx_fifo);
>
> Does this need to be ARRAY_SIZE to account for unit32_t indexing?
Yes, good catch.
-- PMM
