Re: [RFC PATCH v3 1/3] hw/intc/arm_gicv3: Check for !MEMTX_OK instead of MEMTX_ERROR

[Philippe Mathieu-Daudé]

Hi Peter,

Can you take this single patch via your arm tree?

Thanks,

Phil.

On 12/15/21 19:24, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Quoting Peter Maydell:
> 
>  "These MEMTX_* aren't from the memory transaction
>   API functions; they're just being used by gicd_readl() and
>   friends as a way to indicate a success/failure so that the
>   actual MemoryRegionOps read/write fns like gicv3_dist_read()
>   can log a guest error."
> 
> We are going to introduce more MemTxResult bits, so it is
> safer to check for !MEMTX_OK rather than MEMTX_ERROR.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
> Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
> ---
>  hw/intc/arm_gicv3_redist.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/intc/arm_gicv3_redist.c b/hw/intc/arm_gicv3_redist.c
> index c8ff3eca085..99b11ca5eee 100644
> --- a/hw/intc/arm_gicv3_redist.c
> +++ b/hw/intc/arm_gicv3_redist.c
> @@ -462,7 +462,7 @@ MemTxResult gicv3_redist_read(void *opaque, hwaddr 
> offset, uint64_t *data,
>          break;
>      }
>  
> -    if (r == MEMTX_ERROR) {
> +    if (r != MEMTX_OK) {
>          qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR,
>                        "%s: invalid guest read at offset " TARGET_FMT_plx
>                        " size %u\n", __func__, offset, size);
> @@ -521,7 +521,7 @@ MemTxResult gicv3_redist_write(void *opaque, hwaddr 
> offset, uint64_t data,
>          break;
>      }
>  
> -    if (r == MEMTX_ERROR) {
> +    if (r != MEMTX_OK) {
>          qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR,
>                        "%s: invalid guest write at offset " TARGET_FMT_plx
>                        " size %u\n", __func__, offset, size);