[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v3 2/7] wdt_ib700: Don't use SoftFloat int64 type

["Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com>]

On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 05:25:26PM +0100, Andreas Färber wrote:
> softfloat.h's int64 type has least-width semantics,
> but this doesn't seem intended here, so use plain int64_t.
> 
> v3:
> * Split off.
> 
> Cc: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <andreas.faerber@web.de>
> ---
>  hw/wdt_ib700.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/wdt_ib700.c b/hw/wdt_ib700.c
> index b6235eb..1248464 100644
> --- a/hw/wdt_ib700.c
> +++ b/hw/wdt_ib700.c
> @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ static void ib700_write_enable_reg(void *vp, uint32_t addr, uint32_t data)
>          30, 28, 26, 24, 22, 20, 18, 16,
>          14, 12, 10,  8,  6,  4,  2,  0
>      };
> -    int64 timeout;
> +    int64_t timeout;
>  
>      ib700_debug("addr = %x, data = %x\n", addr, data);

The use of int64(_t) was just so that the timeout calculation in the
next two lines would not overflow:

   timeout = (int64_t) time_map[data & 0xF] * get_ticks_per_sec();
   qemu_mod_timer(s->timer, qemu_get_clock (vm_clock) + timeout);

and from you say it does seem like it was a mistake to use int64
instead of int64_t.

ACK.

In more general terms, am I doing the timeout correctly in this code?

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines.  Tiny program with many
powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc.
http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top