From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56201)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1Z4Tkd-0000Ux-Vp
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 08:44:33 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1Z4Tka-000642-Nq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 08:44:31 -0400
Received: from mail-yk0-f177.google.com ([209.85.160.177]:36188)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1Z4Tka-00063c-D3
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 08:44:28 -0400
Received: by ykaz81 with SMTP id z81so55097990yka.3
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 05:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <a209e3d8ae00cda55260c970891f520210e26bad.1434066412.git.peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com>
References: <cover.1434066412.git.peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com>
	<a209e3d8ae00cda55260c970891f520210e26bad.1434066412.git.peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com>
From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 13:44:07 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA8TRD6wGp8Qhtu=SVbZ8bnsCEAkudecOreGGAM9uv6xuA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH target-arm v2 04/13] arm: Refactor
 get_phys_addr FSR return mechanism
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com>
Cc: Edgar Iglesias <edgar.iglesias@xilinx.com>, jues@xilinx.com, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Zach Pfeffer <zach.pfeffer@xilinx.com>, Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@xilinx.com>

On 12 June 2015 at 20:10, Peter Crosthwaite
<peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com> wrote:
> Currently, the return code for get_phys_addr is overloaded for both
> success/fail and FSR value return. This doesn't handle the case where
> there is an error with a 0 FSR. This case exists in PMSAv7.
>
> So rework get_phys_addr and friends to return a success/failure boolean
> return code and populate the FSR via a caller provided uint32_t
> pointer.

true-on-failure, false-on-success is an odd way round for a
success/failure bool, but I guess it keeps the rest of the code
from changing too much...

-- PMM