From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36302) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcuEp-0002r1-J9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 07:21:44 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcuEk-0002Ci-Kj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 07:21:43 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52673) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcuEk-0002CX-EG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 07:21:38 -0400 Message-ID: <551A8332.3050400@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:21:22 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1427715918-25768-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <1427715918-25768-2-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <551A82BD.8010604@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <551A82BD.8010604@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-2.3 1/6] sb16: remove useless mixer_write_indexw List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, Mark Cave-Ayland On 31/03/2015 13:19, Andreas F=E4rber wrote: > Am 30.03.2015 um 13:45 schrieb Paolo Bonzini: >> ioport.c is already able to split a 16-bit access into two 8-bit >> accesses to consecutive ports. Tested with Epic Pinball. >> >> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini >> --- >> hw/audio/sb16.c | 7 ------- >> 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/hw/audio/sb16.c b/hw/audio/sb16.c >> index 444eb9e..b052de5 100644 >> --- a/hw/audio/sb16.c >> +++ b/hw/audio/sb16.c >> @@ -1121,12 +1121,6 @@ static IO_WRITE_PROTO (mixer_write_datab) >> s->mixer_regs[s->mixer_nreg] =3D val; >> } >> =20 >> -static IO_WRITE_PROTO (mixer_write_indexw) >> -{ >> - mixer_write_indexb (opaque, nport, val & 0xff); >> - mixer_write_datab (opaque, nport, (val >> 8) & 0xff); >> -} >=20 > I assume you've verified the endianness handling, too? Yes, it's little-endian in either case: mrp->write(mrpio->portio_opaque, mrp->base + addr, data & 0xff); mrp->write(mrpio->portio_opaque, mrp->base + addr + 1, data >> 8)= ; for the sb16, index is 0x224 and data is 0x225. Paolo