[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] Fix up pxe boot

["Glauber Costa" <glommer@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 12:20 PM, Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com> wrote:
> Glauber Costa wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 5:39 AM, Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Glauber Costa wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/target-i386/op_helper.c b/target-i386/op_helper.c
>>>> index 0b5fdc0..433aa3f 100644
>>>> --- a/target-i386/op_helper.c
>>>> +++ b/target-i386/op_helper.c
>>>> @@ -600,7 +600,7 @@ do {\
>>>>  #define PUSHL(ssp, sp, sp_mask, val)\
>>>>  {\
>>>>    sp -= 4;\
>>>> -    stl_kernel((ssp) + (sp & (sp_mask)), (val));\
>>>> +    stl_kernel((uint32_t)((ssp) + (sp & (sp_mask))), (uint32_t)(val));\
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Surly it is better to push this into the underlying virtual->physical
>>> translation functions, so it applies everywhere?
>>>
>>> btw, the cast is wrong for x86-64, so it must be qualified for 32-bit
>>> operating modes.
>>>
>>
>> The tests were all done with x86_64. This is a PUSHL macro, so it's
>> 32-bit anyway.
>> A x86_64-only PUSHQ seems to do the right thing.
>>
>>
>
> Right.
>
> It's still odd to see this in an op helper rather than in somewhere generic.
>
I'll take a closer look today to see if I can improve it better.

> --
> error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
>
>



-- 
Glauber Costa.
"Free as in Freedom"
http://glommer.net

"The less confident you are, the more serious you have to act."