From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1IrDRc-0005Ss-9l
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 11 Nov 2007 09:05:48 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1IrDRa-0005Sf-Fq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 11 Nov 2007 09:05:47 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IrDRa-0005SX-6N
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 11 Nov 2007 09:05:46 -0500
Received: from tapir.sajinet.com.pe ([66.139.79.212])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <carenas@sajinet.com.pe>) id 1IrDRZ-00074e-5R
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 11 Nov 2007 09:05:45 -0500
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 08:10:25 -0600
From: Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon <carenas@sajinet.com.pe>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu target-alpha/op_helper.c target-arm/op_hel...
Message-ID: <20071111141025.GD25322@tapir>
References: <E1IrC2d-0005MZ-D9@cvs.savannah.gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <E1IrC2d-0005MZ-D9@cvs.savannah.gnu.org>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 12:35:55PM +0000, Fabrice Bellard wrote:
> Modified files:
> 	target-alpha   : op_helper.c 
> 	target-arm     : op_helper.c 
> 	target-cris    : op_helper.c 
> 	target-m68k    : op_helper.c 
> 	target-ppc     : op_helper.c 
> 
> Log message:
> 	fixed invalid type

why was target_phys_addr_t and invalid type for the program counter? or you
mean that it is better to cast it to unsigned long so that you can never
overflow the pointer and so using unsigned long was better?

Carlo