On 26 July 2014 08:26, Stefan Weil wrote:
> Static code analyzers complain about a dubious & operation used for a
> boolean value. The code does not test the PSTATE_SP bit as it should.
>
> Cc: Peter Maydell
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil
> ---
>
> Hello Peter,
>
> I'm not sure whether the "!" is
On 26 July 2014 08:26, Stefan Weil wrote:
> Static code analyzers complain about a dubious & operation used for a
> boolean value. The code does not test the PSTATE_SP bit as it should.
>
> Cc: Peter Maydell
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil
> ---
>
> Hello Peter,
>
> I'm not sure whether the "!" is
Static code analyzers complain about a dubious & operation used for a
boolean value. The code does not test the PSTATE_SP bit as it should.
Cc: Peter Maydell
Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil
---
Hello Peter,
I'm not sure whether the "!" is correct at all, because code and comment
don't seem to match