| Message ID | 1433351328-23326-9-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: > This is a required step to implement read_with_attrs and write_with_attrs. > > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> > --- > hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c | 96 ++++++------------------------------------------- Nice stats. > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c > index 7507a15..0b3667a 100644 > --- a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c > +++ b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c > @@ -650,101 +650,25 @@ static void pflash_write(pflash_t *pfl, hwaddr offset, > } > > > -static uint32_t pflash_readb_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) > -{ > - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 1); > -} > - > -static uint32_t pflash_readb_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) > -{ > - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 0); > -} > - > -static uint32_t pflash_readw_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) > +static uint64_t pflash_mem_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned len) > { > pflash_t *pfl = opaque; > + bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE)); !!() not needed. Otherwise Reviewed-by: Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.om> > > - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 2, 1); > + return pflash_read(pfl, addr, len, be); > } > > -static uint32_t pflash_readw_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) > +static void pflash_mem_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t value, unsigned len) > { > pflash_t *pfl = opaque; > + bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE)); > > - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 2, 0); > + pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, len, be); > } > > -static uint32_t pflash_readl_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) > -{ > - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; > - > - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 4, 1); > -} > - > -static uint32_t pflash_readl_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) > -{ > - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; > - > - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 4, 0); > -} > - > -static void pflash_writeb_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, > - uint32_t value) > -{ > - pflash_write(opaque, addr, value, 1, 1); > -} > - > -static void pflash_writeb_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, > - uint32_t value) > -{ > - pflash_write(opaque, addr, value, 1, 0); > -} > - > -static void pflash_writew_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, > - uint32_t value) > -{ > - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; > - > - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 2, 1); > -} > - > -static void pflash_writew_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, > - uint32_t value) > -{ > - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; > - > - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 2, 0); > -} > - > -static void pflash_writel_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, > - uint32_t value) > -{ > - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; > - > - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 4, 1); > -} > - > -static void pflash_writel_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, > - uint32_t value) > -{ > - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; > - > - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 4, 0); > -} > - > -static const MemoryRegionOps pflash_cfi01_ops_be = { > - .old_mmio = { > - .read = { pflash_readb_be, pflash_readw_be, pflash_readl_be, }, > - .write = { pflash_writeb_be, pflash_writew_be, pflash_writel_be, }, > - }, > - .endianness = DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN, > -}; > - > -static const MemoryRegionOps pflash_cfi01_ops_le = { > - .old_mmio = { > - .read = { pflash_readb_le, pflash_readw_le, pflash_readl_le, }, > - .write = { pflash_writeb_le, pflash_writew_le, pflash_writel_le, }, > - }, > +static const MemoryRegionOps pflash_cfi01_ops = { > + .read = pflash_mem_read, > + .write = pflash_mem_write, > .endianness = DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN, > }; > > @@ -775,7 +699,7 @@ static void pflash_cfi01_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) > > memory_region_init_rom_device( > &pfl->mem, OBJECT(dev), > - pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE) ? &pflash_cfi01_ops_be : &pflash_cfi01_ops_le, > + &pflash_cfi01_ops, > pfl, > pfl->name, total_len, &local_err); > if (local_err) { > -- > 2.4.1 > > >
On 04/06/2015 08:19, Peter Crosthwaite wrote: > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: >> This is a required step to implement read_with_attrs and write_with_attrs. >> >> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> >> --- >> hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c | 96 ++++++------------------------------------------- > > Nice stats. > >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c >> index 7507a15..0b3667a 100644 >> --- a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c >> +++ b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c >> @@ -650,101 +650,25 @@ static void pflash_write(pflash_t *pfl, hwaddr offset, >> } >> >> >> -static uint32_t pflash_readb_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >> -{ >> - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 1); >> -} >> - >> -static uint32_t pflash_readb_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >> -{ >> - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 0); >> -} >> - >> -static uint32_t pflash_readw_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >> +static uint64_t pflash_mem_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned len) >> { >> pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >> + bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE)); > > !!() not needed. Otherwise I don't like magic bool-ification... Is there a coding style item that forbids this idiom in bool assignments? Paolo > Reviewed-by: Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.om> > >> >> - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 2, 1); >> + return pflash_read(pfl, addr, len, be); >> } >> >> -static uint32_t pflash_readw_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >> +static void pflash_mem_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t value, unsigned len) >> { >> pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >> + bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE)); >> >> - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 2, 0); >> + pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, len, be); >> } >> >> -static uint32_t pflash_readl_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >> -{ >> - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >> - >> - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 4, 1); >> -} >> - >> -static uint32_t pflash_readl_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >> -{ >> - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >> - >> - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 4, 0); >> -} >> - >> -static void pflash_writeb_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, >> - uint32_t value) >> -{ >> - pflash_write(opaque, addr, value, 1, 1); >> -} >> - >> -static void pflash_writeb_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, >> - uint32_t value) >> -{ >> - pflash_write(opaque, addr, value, 1, 0); >> -} >> - >> -static void pflash_writew_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, >> - uint32_t value) >> -{ >> - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >> - >> - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 2, 1); >> -} >> - >> -static void pflash_writew_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, >> - uint32_t value) >> -{ >> - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >> - >> - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 2, 0); >> -} >> - >> -static void pflash_writel_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, >> - uint32_t value) >> -{ >> - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >> - >> - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 4, 1); >> -} >> - >> -static void pflash_writel_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, >> - uint32_t value) >> -{ >> - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >> - >> - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 4, 0); >> -} >> - >> -static const MemoryRegionOps pflash_cfi01_ops_be = { >> - .old_mmio = { >> - .read = { pflash_readb_be, pflash_readw_be, pflash_readl_be, }, >> - .write = { pflash_writeb_be, pflash_writew_be, pflash_writel_be, }, >> - }, >> - .endianness = DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN, >> -}; >> - >> -static const MemoryRegionOps pflash_cfi01_ops_le = { >> - .old_mmio = { >> - .read = { pflash_readb_le, pflash_readw_le, pflash_readl_le, }, >> - .write = { pflash_writeb_le, pflash_writew_le, pflash_writel_le, }, >> - }, >> +static const MemoryRegionOps pflash_cfi01_ops = { >> + .read = pflash_mem_read, >> + .write = pflash_mem_write, >> .endianness = DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN, >> }; >> >> @@ -775,7 +699,7 @@ static void pflash_cfi01_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) >> >> memory_region_init_rom_device( >> &pfl->mem, OBJECT(dev), >> - pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE) ? &pflash_cfi01_ops_be : &pflash_cfi01_ops_le, >> + &pflash_cfi01_ops, >> pfl, >> pfl->name, total_len, &local_err); >> if (local_err) { >> -- >> 2.4.1 >> >> >>
On 06/04/15 10:02, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 04/06/2015 08:19, Peter Crosthwaite wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: >>> This is a required step to implement read_with_attrs and write_with_attrs. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c | 96 ++++++------------------------------------------- >> >> Nice stats. >> >>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c >>> index 7507a15..0b3667a 100644 >>> --- a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c >>> +++ b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c >>> @@ -650,101 +650,25 @@ static void pflash_write(pflash_t *pfl, hwaddr offset, >>> } >>> >>> >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readb_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >>> -{ >>> - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 1); >>> -} >>> - >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readb_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >>> -{ >>> - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 0); >>> -} >>> - >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readw_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >>> +static uint64_t pflash_mem_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned len) >>> { >>> pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >>> + bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE)); >> >> !!() not needed. Otherwise > > I don't like magic bool-ification... Is there a coding style item that > forbids this idiom in bool assignments? (Side remark: in edk2, BOOLEAN is actually UINT8. !!(expr) -- or, ((expr) != 0) -- is a necessity there.) Thanks Laszlo > > Paolo > >> Reviewed-by: Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.om> >> >>> >>> - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 2, 1); >>> + return pflash_read(pfl, addr, len, be); >>> } >>> >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readw_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >>> +static void pflash_mem_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t value, unsigned len) >>> { >>> pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >>> + bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE)); >>> >>> - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 2, 0); >>> + pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, len, be); >>> } >>> >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readl_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >>> -{ >>> - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >>> - >>> - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 4, 1); >>> -} >>> - >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readl_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >>> -{ >>> - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >>> - >>> - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 4, 0); >>> -} >>> - >>> -static void pflash_writeb_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, >>> - uint32_t value) >>> -{ >>> - pflash_write(opaque, addr, value, 1, 1); >>> -} >>> - >>> -static void pflash_writeb_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, >>> - uint32_t value) >>> -{ >>> - pflash_write(opaque, addr, value, 1, 0); >>> -} >>> - >>> -static void pflash_writew_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, >>> - uint32_t value) >>> -{ >>> - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >>> - >>> - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 2, 1); >>> -} >>> - >>> -static void pflash_writew_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, >>> - uint32_t value) >>> -{ >>> - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >>> - >>> - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 2, 0); >>> -} >>> - >>> -static void pflash_writel_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, >>> - uint32_t value) >>> -{ >>> - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >>> - >>> - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 4, 1); >>> -} >>> - >>> -static void pflash_writel_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, >>> - uint32_t value) >>> -{ >>> - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >>> - >>> - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 4, 0); >>> -} >>> - >>> -static const MemoryRegionOps pflash_cfi01_ops_be = { >>> - .old_mmio = { >>> - .read = { pflash_readb_be, pflash_readw_be, pflash_readl_be, }, >>> - .write = { pflash_writeb_be, pflash_writew_be, pflash_writel_be, }, >>> - }, >>> - .endianness = DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN, >>> -}; >>> - >>> -static const MemoryRegionOps pflash_cfi01_ops_le = { >>> - .old_mmio = { >>> - .read = { pflash_readb_le, pflash_readw_le, pflash_readl_le, }, >>> - .write = { pflash_writeb_le, pflash_writew_le, pflash_writel_le, }, >>> - }, >>> +static const MemoryRegionOps pflash_cfi01_ops = { >>> + .read = pflash_mem_read, >>> + .write = pflash_mem_write, >>> .endianness = DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN, >>> }; >>> >>> @@ -775,7 +699,7 @@ static void pflash_cfi01_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) >>> >>> memory_region_init_rom_device( >>> &pfl->mem, OBJECT(dev), >>> - pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE) ? &pflash_cfi01_ops_be : &pflash_cfi01_ops_le, >>> + &pflash_cfi01_ops, >>> pfl, >>> pfl->name, total_len, &local_err); >>> if (local_err) { >>> -- >>> 2.4.1 >>> >>> >>>
On 06/04/2015 01:02 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 04/06/2015 08:19, Peter Crosthwaite wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: >>> This is a required step to implement read_with_attrs and write_with_attrs. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c | 96 ++++++------------------------------------------- >> >> Nice stats. >> >>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c >>> index 7507a15..0b3667a 100644 >>> --- a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c >>> +++ b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c >>> @@ -650,101 +650,25 @@ static void pflash_write(pflash_t *pfl, hwaddr offset, >>> } >>> >>> >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readb_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >>> -{ >>> - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 1); >>> -} >>> - >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readb_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >>> -{ >>> - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 0); >>> -} >>> - >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readw_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) >>> +static uint64_t pflash_mem_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned len) >>> { >>> pflash_t *pfl = opaque; >>> + bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE)); >> >> !!() not needed. Otherwise > > I don't like magic bool-ification... I don't like !! just as much. If you don't like implicit conversion, then use != 0. > Is there a coding style item that > forbids this idiom in bool assignments? No. Indeed, nothing in coding style about bool at all. r~
On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 11:08:31AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 06/04/2015 01:02 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > > > > On 04/06/2015 08:19, Peter Crosthwaite wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: > >>> This is a required step to implement read_with_attrs and write_with_attrs. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> > >>> --- > >>> hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c | 96 ++++++------------------------------------------- > >> > >> Nice stats. > >> > >>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c > >>> index 7507a15..0b3667a 100644 > >>> --- a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c > >>> +++ b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c > >>> @@ -650,101 +650,25 @@ static void pflash_write(pflash_t *pfl, hwaddr offset, > >>> } > >>> > >>> > >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readb_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) > >>> -{ > >>> - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 1); > >>> -} > >>> - > >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readb_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) > >>> -{ > >>> - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 0); > >>> -} > >>> - > >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readw_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) > >>> +static uint64_t pflash_mem_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned len) > >>> { > >>> pflash_t *pfl = opaque; > >>> + bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE)); > >> > >> !!() not needed. Otherwise > > > > I don't like magic bool-ification... > > I don't like !! just as much. If you don't like implicit conversion, then use > != 0. > > Is there a coding style item that > > forbids this idiom in bool assignments? > > No. Indeed, nothing in coding style about bool at all. > > > r~ Looks like it's a matter of taste. FWIW I like !! or implicit conversions, and dislike != 0 as too verbose :)
On 09/06/2015 20:08, Richard Henderson wrote: > > > + bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE)); > > > > > > !!() not needed. Otherwise > > > > I don't like magic bool-ification... > > I don't like !! just as much. If you don't like implicit conversion, then use > != 0. Fair enough, let's add to the coding still that we don't like !!. Paolo
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> writes: > On 09/06/2015 20:08, Richard Henderson wrote: >> > > + bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE)); >> > > >> > > !!() not needed. Otherwise >> > >> > I don't like magic bool-ification... >> >> I don't like !! just as much. If you don't like implicit conversion, then use >> != 0. > > Fair enough, let's add to the coding still that we don't like !!. $ git-grep '!!' | wc -l 369 $ git-grep -l '!!' | wc -l 170 Adding arbitrary rules to CODING_STYLE is one thing, adding rules that are widely violated in existing code and not flagged by checkpatch.pl is quite another.
diff --git a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c index 7507a15..0b3667a 100644 --- a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c +++ b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c @@ -650,101 +650,25 @@ static void pflash_write(pflash_t *pfl, hwaddr offset, } -static uint32_t pflash_readb_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) -{ - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 1); -} - -static uint32_t pflash_readb_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) -{ - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 0); -} - -static uint32_t pflash_readw_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) +static uint64_t pflash_mem_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned len) { pflash_t *pfl = opaque; + bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE)); - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 2, 1); + return pflash_read(pfl, addr, len, be); } -static uint32_t pflash_readw_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) +static void pflash_mem_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t value, unsigned len) { pflash_t *pfl = opaque; + bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE)); - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 2, 0); + pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, len, be); } -static uint32_t pflash_readl_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) -{ - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; - - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 4, 1); -} - -static uint32_t pflash_readl_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr) -{ - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; - - return pflash_read(pfl, addr, 4, 0); -} - -static void pflash_writeb_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, - uint32_t value) -{ - pflash_write(opaque, addr, value, 1, 1); -} - -static void pflash_writeb_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, - uint32_t value) -{ - pflash_write(opaque, addr, value, 1, 0); -} - -static void pflash_writew_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, - uint32_t value) -{ - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; - - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 2, 1); -} - -static void pflash_writew_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, - uint32_t value) -{ - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; - - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 2, 0); -} - -static void pflash_writel_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, - uint32_t value) -{ - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; - - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 4, 1); -} - -static void pflash_writel_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, - uint32_t value) -{ - pflash_t *pfl = opaque; - - pflash_write(pfl, addr, value, 4, 0); -} - -static const MemoryRegionOps pflash_cfi01_ops_be = { - .old_mmio = { - .read = { pflash_readb_be, pflash_readw_be, pflash_readl_be, }, - .write = { pflash_writeb_be, pflash_writew_be, pflash_writel_be, }, - }, - .endianness = DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN, -}; - -static const MemoryRegionOps pflash_cfi01_ops_le = { - .old_mmio = { - .read = { pflash_readb_le, pflash_readw_le, pflash_readl_le, }, - .write = { pflash_writeb_le, pflash_writew_le, pflash_writel_le, }, - }, +static const MemoryRegionOps pflash_cfi01_ops = { + .read = pflash_mem_read, + .write = pflash_mem_write, .endianness = DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN, }; @@ -775,7 +699,7 @@ static void pflash_cfi01_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) memory_region_init_rom_device( &pfl->mem, OBJECT(dev), - pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE) ? &pflash_cfi01_ops_be : &pflash_cfi01_ops_le, + &pflash_cfi01_ops, pfl, pfl->name, total_len, &local_err); if (local_err) {
This is a required step to implement read_with_attrs and write_with_attrs. Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> --- hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c | 96 ++++++------------------------------------------- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-)