On Wednesday, 2021-03-10 at 00:50:23 +01, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> There is only one call to pflash_setup_mappings(). Convert 'rom_mode'
> to boolean and set it to true directly within pflash_setup_mappings().
>
> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com>
> ---
> hw/block/pflash_cfi02.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/block/pflash_cfi02.c b/hw/block/pflash_cfi02.c
> index 845f50ed99b..5f949b4c792 100644
> --- a/hw/block/pflash_cfi02.c
> +++ b/hw/block/pflash_cfi02.c
> @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ struct PFlashCFI02 {
> MemoryRegion mem;
> MemoryRegion *mem_mappings; /* array; one per mapping */
> MemoryRegion orig_mem;
> - int rom_mode;
> + bool rom_mode;
Given this, doesn't the second argument to pflash_register_memory() need
to change to bool, affecting its callers?
> int read_counter; /* used for lazy switch-back to rom mode */
> int sectors_to_erase;
> uint64_t erase_time_remaining;
> @@ -181,6 +181,7 @@ static void pflash_setup_mappings(PFlashCFI02 *pfl)
> "pflash-alias", &pfl->orig_mem, 0, size);
> memory_region_add_subregion(&pfl->mem, i * size,
> &pfl->mem_mappings[i]);
> }
> + pfl->rom_mode = true;
> }
>
> static void pflash_register_memory(PFlashCFI02 *pfl, int rom_mode)
> @@ -927,7 +928,6 @@ static void pflash_cfi02_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error
> **errp)
> pfl->sector_erase_map = bitmap_new(pfl->total_sectors);
>
> pflash_setup_mappings(pfl);
> - pfl->rom_mode = 1;
> sysbus_init_mmio(SYS_BUS_DEVICE(dev), &pfl->mem);
>
> timer_init_ns(&pfl->timer, QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL, pflash_timer, pfl);
> --
> 2.26.2
dme.
--
And you can't hold me down, 'cause I belong to the hurricane.
