On 19 August 2012 11:59, Brendan Fennell <address@hidden> wrote:
Signed-off-by: Brendan Fennell <address@hidden>
---
hw/pl190.c | 3 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/pl190.c b/hw/pl190.c
index cb50afb..eddb531 100644
--- a/hw/pl190.c
+++ b/hw/pl190.c
@@ -120,7 +120,8 @@ static uint64_t pl190_read(void *opaque, target_phys_addr_t
offset,
current priority level to that of the current interrupt. */
for (i = 0; i < s->priority; i++)
{
- if ((s->level | s->soft_level) & s->prio_mask[i])
+ /* Ensure that 'i' is current highest priority interrupt on exit */
+ if ((s->level | s->soft_level) & s->prio_mask[i+1])
break;
}
/* Reading this value with no pending interrupts is undefined.
--
1.7.2.5
The technical content of this patch looks correct to me, and I've tested
it on a versatilepb Linux image. (Presumably Linux doesn't make use
of different vector addresses/priorities, which is why we haven't noticed
this bug before now.)
As Blue says, you need to fix the coding style issues (you can run
your patch through scripts/checkpatch.pl to help with this). checkpatch
is probably going to end up getting you to fix the indent on the
whole for() loop, which is fine -- we usually fix up the coding style
locally when we make a change. (the key bits of coding style here are
4 space indent, open-brace on same line as 'for' and 'if', braces
mandatory even for single line 'if' bodies.)