From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56657) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YzVbT-0002u9-Qx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 15:42:32 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YzVbQ-0006xu-HQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 15:42:31 -0400 Received: from mail-lb0-x244.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c04::244]:35878) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YzVbQ-0006xh-9W for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 15:42:28 -0400 Received: by lbiv13 with SMTP id v13so5646452lbi.3 for ; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 12:42:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <556CB5A1.3000306@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2015 22:42:25 +0300 From: Sergey Fedorov MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1432810851-8648-1-git-send-email-serge.fdrv@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target-arm: use extended address bits from supersection short descriptor List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers On 01.06.2015 20:02, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 28 May 2015 at 12:00, Sergey Fedorov wrote: >> --- >> target-arm/helper.c | 2 ++ >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/target-arm/helper.c b/target-arm/helper.c >> index 5d0f011..fc3f192 100644 >> --- a/target-arm/helper.c >> +++ b/target-arm/helper.c >> @@ -5333,6 +5333,8 @@ static int get_phys_addr_v6(CPUARMState *env, uint32_t address, int access_type, >> if (desc & (1 << 18)) { >> /* Supersection. */ >> phys_addr = (desc & 0xff000000) | (address & 0x00ffffff); >> + phys_addr |= ((uint64_t)extract32(desc, 20, 4) << 32); >> + phys_addr |= ((uint64_t)extract32(desc, 5, 4) << 36); >> *page_size = 0x1000000; >> } else { >> /* Section. */ > This looks OK codewise, but I can't apply it because you've > forgotten the signed-off-by line. > > Can you also provide a useful commit message, please? > Patches should pretty much always have a long-form > commit message, except possibly when they're part of > a large patch series, and rarely even then. (For instance > in this case it's worth mentioning that supporting these > extra bits is IMPDEF in v6 and in v7-without-LPAE but > required in LPAE.) > > thanks > -- PMM Thanks, Peter. Your comments are very useful, as always :) Sorry for forgetting sign-off-by. Will resend the patch soon! Best, Sergey