From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NK9iF-00027h-SX
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 07:07:40 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NK9iB-00026a-QE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 07:07:39 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50953 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NK9iB-00026T-H3
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 07:07:35 -0500
Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:61947)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <paul@codesourcery.com>)
	id 1NK9iA-0000Nq-Ta
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 07:07:35 -0500
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([38.113.113.100])
	by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <paul@codesourcery.com>) id 1NK9iA-000648-6g
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 07:07:34 -0500
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] correcting ARM CPSR register bit position
	comment
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 12:07:22 +0000
References: <1260788953-30794-1-git-send-email-nemesisofstate@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1260788953-30794-1-git-send-email-nemesisofstate@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200912141207.22651.paul@codesourcery.com>
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
Cc: nemesisofstate <nemesisofstate@gmail.com>

> -    uint32_t VF; /* V is the bit 31. All other bits are undefined */
> +    uint32_t VF; /* V is the bit 28. */

No. The original comment is correct.

Paul