| Message ID | 1425215915-26043-1-git-send-email-sw@weilnetz.de |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
01.03.2015 16:18, Stefan Weil wrote: > Warnings from the Sparse static analysis tool: [...] > @@ -738,7 +737,9 @@ get_field_special (long instr, struct op_code_struct * op) > default : > { > if ( ((((instr & IMM_MASK) >> IMM_LOW) ^ op->immval_mask) & 0xE000) == REG_PVR_MASK) { > - sprintf(tmpstr, "%spvr%d", register_prefix, (unsigned short)(((instr & IMM_MASK) >> IMM_LOW) ^ op->immval_mask) ^ REG_PVR_MASK); > + sprintf(tmpstr, "%s%u", pvr_register_prefix, > + (unsigned short)(((instr & IMM_MASK) >> IMM_LOW) ^ > + op->immval_mask) ^ REG_PVR_MASK); Is this word wrapping intentionally put into this patch or was it supposed to be a separate patch? Thanks, /mjt
Am 02.03.2015 um 12:04 schrieb Michael Tokarev: > 01.03.2015 16:18, Stefan Weil wrote: >> Warnings from the Sparse static analysis tool: > [...] >> @@ -738,7 +737,9 @@ get_field_special (long instr, struct op_code_struct * op) >> default : >> { >> if ( ((((instr & IMM_MASK) >> IMM_LOW) ^ op->immval_mask) & 0xE000) == REG_PVR_MASK) { >> - sprintf(tmpstr, "%spvr%d", register_prefix, (unsigned short)(((instr & IMM_MASK) >> IMM_LOW) ^ op->immval_mask) ^ REG_PVR_MASK); >> + sprintf(tmpstr, "%s%u", pvr_register_prefix, >> + (unsigned short)(((instr & IMM_MASK) >> IMM_LOW) ^ >> + op->immval_mask) ^ REG_PVR_MASK); > Is this word wrapping intentionally put into this patch or > was it supposed to be a separate patch? > > Thanks, > > /mjt It's part of the fix ("%spvr%d", register_prefix was replaced by "%s%u", pvr_register_prefix). The wrapping was needed to satisfy codecheck.pl. Stefan
Applied to -trivial, thank you! /mjt
diff --git a/disas/microblaze.c b/disas/microblaze.c index ec91af3..9f2464d 100644 --- a/disas/microblaze.c +++ b/disas/microblaze.c @@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ enum microblaze_instr_type { #define MAX_OPCODES 280 -struct op_code_struct { +static struct op_code_struct { const char *name; short inst_type; /* registers and immediate values involved */ short inst_offset_type; /* immediate vals offset from PC? (= 1 for branches) */ @@ -567,10 +567,9 @@ struct op_code_struct { }; /* prefix for register names */ -char register_prefix[] = "r"; -char special_register_prefix[] = "spr"; -char fsl_register_prefix[] = "rfsl"; -char pvr_register_prefix[] = "rpvr"; +static const char register_prefix[] = "r"; +static const char fsl_register_prefix[] = "rfsl"; +static const char pvr_register_prefix[] = "rpvr"; /* #defines for valid immediate range */ @@ -738,7 +737,9 @@ get_field_special (long instr, struct op_code_struct * op) default : { if ( ((((instr & IMM_MASK) >> IMM_LOW) ^ op->immval_mask) & 0xE000) == REG_PVR_MASK) { - sprintf(tmpstr, "%spvr%d", register_prefix, (unsigned short)(((instr & IMM_MASK) >> IMM_LOW) ^ op->immval_mask) ^ REG_PVR_MASK); + sprintf(tmpstr, "%s%u", pvr_register_prefix, + (unsigned short)(((instr & IMM_MASK) >> IMM_LOW) ^ + op->immval_mask) ^ REG_PVR_MASK); return(strdup(tmpstr)); } else { strcpy(spr, "pc");
Warnings from the Sparse static analysis tool: disas/microblaze.c:289:3: warning: symbol 'opcodes' was not declared. Should it be static? disas/microblaze.c:570:6: warning: symbol 'register_prefix' was not declared. Should it be static? disas/microblaze.c:571:6: warning: symbol 'special_register_prefix' was not declared. Should it be static? disas/microblaze.c:572:6: warning: symbol 'fsl_register_prefix' was not declared. Should it be static? disas/microblaze.c:573:6: warning: symbol 'pvr_register_prefix' was not declared. Should it be static? Remove the unused variable special_register_prefix. The variable pvr_register_prefix was unused, too, but can be used. Add also 'const' where possible. Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil <sw@weilnetz.de> --- This patch does not pass checkpatch.pl because of a tab used for indentation (as in most code lines). Regards Stefan disas/microblaze.c | 13 +++++++------ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)