From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54842 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q6TKW-0004pv-V2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 03 Apr 2011 15:51:26 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q6TKV-0003ar-FI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 03 Apr 2011 15:51:24 -0400 Received: from hall.aurel32.net ([88.191.126.93]:53384) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q6TKV-0003aV-7x for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 03 Apr 2011 15:51:23 -0400 Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 21:51:18 +0200 From: Aurelien Jarno Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw/pflash_cfi02: Fix lazy reset of ROMD mode Message-ID: <20110403195118.GA23034@volta.aurel32.net> References: <1300137058-16576-1-git-send-email-jordan.l.justen@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1300137058-16576-1-git-send-email-jordan.l.justen@intel.com> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: jordan.l.justen@intel.com Cc: jljusten@gmail.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 02:10:58PM -0700, jordan.l.justen@intel.com wrote: > From: Jordan Justen > > When checking pfl->rom_mode for when to lazily reenter ROMD mode, > the value was check was the opposite of what it should have been. > This prevent the part from returning to ROMD mode after a write > was made to the CFI rom region. > --- > hw/pflash_cfi02.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/pflash_cfi02.c b/hw/pflash_cfi02.c > index 3594a36..a936cdb 100644 > --- a/hw/pflash_cfi02.c > +++ b/hw/pflash_cfi02.c > @@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ static uint32_t pflash_read (pflash_t *pfl, target_phys_addr_t offset, > > DPRINTF("%s: offset " TARGET_FMT_plx "\n", __func__, offset); > ret = -1; > - if (pfl->rom_mode) { > + if (!pfl->rom_mode) { > /* Lazy reset of to ROMD mode */ > if (pfl->wcycle == 0) > pflash_register_memory(pfl, 1); The patch looks correct, but is missing a Signed-off-by: line. Can you please resend it? -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurelien@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net