Hi Dimitry,
On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 12:29 PM Conrad Meyer wrote:
> Please un-disable the Makefile warnings removed in r357349 earlier, too.
Apologies, I just now caught up to my r357366 in my SVN email. Thank you.
Best,
Conrad
___
On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 10:10 AM Dimitry Andric wrote:
>
> On 1 Feb 2020, at 18:48, Ian Lepore wrote:
> >
> > So you're going to switch from writing 0 to writing 0xfffe, and
> > just assume that will work the same?
> > ... [Caustic sarcasm elided]
>
> Hmm, the data sheet says:
>
> Writes
On 1 Feb 2020, at 18:55, Ian Lepore wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2020-01-31 at 19:36 +, Dimitry Andric wrote:
>> Author: dim
>> Date: Fri Jan 31 19:36:14 2020
>> New Revision: 357349
>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/357349
>>
>> Log:
>> Merge r357348 from the clang 10.0.0 import
On 1 Feb 2020, at 18:48, Ian Lepore wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2020-01-31 at 23:36 +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote:
>> Hmm yes, you are quite right. Other parts of the code also seem to
>> use ~TPM_XXX, and the WR4() inline function called takes a
>> uint32_t. I'll revert my change and apply the tilde
On Fri, 2020-01-31 at 19:36 +, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> Author: dim
> Date: Fri Jan 31 19:36:14 2020
> New Revision: 357349
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/357349
>
> Log:
> Merge r357348 from the clang 10.0.0 import branch:
>
> Disable new clang 10.0.0 warnings about
On Fri, 2020-01-31 at 23:36 +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> Hmm yes, you are quite right. Other parts of the code also seem to
> use ~TPM_XXX, and the WR4() inline function called takes a
> uint32_t. I'll revert my change and apply the tilde version instead!
>
> -Dimitry
>
So you're going to
Hmm yes, you are quite right. Other parts of the code also seem to use
~TPM_XXX, and the WR4() inline function called takes a uint32_t. I'll revert
my change and apply the tilde version instead!
-Dimitry
> On 31 Jan 2020, at 22:13, Conrad Meyer wrote:
>
> Hi Dimitry,
>
> Do you think
Hi Dimitry,
Do you think maybe the intent is to use ~TPM_CRB_CTRL_CANCEL_CMD
instead? Plain "0" might also make sense. But I think the compiler
is right here and the warning should not be disabled — !BIT(foo)
doesn't really make sense for a register. It happens to affect the
right bit only
Author: dim
Date: Fri Jan 31 19:36:14 2020
New Revision: 357349
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/357349
Log:
Merge r357348 from the clang 10.0.0 import branch:
Disable new clang 10.0.0 warnings about converting the result of shift
operations to a boolean in tpm(4):
