> On May 18, 2022, at 12:31 AM, Rashmica Gupta <rashm...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2022-05-02 at 01:08 -0700, Peter Delevoryas wrote:
>> I was setting gpioV4-7 to "1110" using the QOM pin property handler
>> and
>> noticed that lowering gpioV7 was inadvertently lowering gpioV4-6 too.
>>
>> (qemu) qom-set /machine/soc/gpio gpioV4 true
>> (qemu) qom-set /machine/soc/gpio gpioV5 true
>> (qemu) qom-set /machine/soc/gpio gpioV6 true
>> (qemu) qom-get /machine/soc/gpio gpioV4
>> true
>> (qemu) qom-set /machine/soc/gpio gpioV7 false
>> (qemu) qom-get /machine/soc/gpio gpioV4
>> false
>>
>> An expression in aspeed_gpio_set_pin_level was using a logical NOT
>> operator instead of a bitwise NOT operator:
>>
>> value &= !pin_mask;
>>
>> The original author probably intended to make a bitwise NOT
>> expression
>> "~", but mistakenly used a logical NOT operator "!" instead. Some
>> programming languages like Rust use "!" for both purposes.
>>
>> Fixes: 4b7f956862dc ("hw/gpio: Add basic Aspeed GPIO model for
>> AST2400 and
>> AST2500")
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Delevoryas <p...@fb.com>
>
>
> Oops! Thanks for catching this. The tests look good.
Thanks!
>
>
