From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org>

The PCI_ADDR() macro use generic PCI fields shifted by 8-bit.
Rewrite it extracting the shift operation one layer.

Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org>
---
 hw/pci-host/bonito.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/hw/pci-host/bonito.c b/hw/pci-host/bonito.c
index a99eced0657..abb3ee86769 100644
--- a/hw/pci-host/bonito.c
+++ b/hw/pci-host/bonito.c
@@ -196,8 +196,8 @@ FIELD(BONGENCFG, PCIQUEUE,      12, 1)
 #define PCI_IDSEL_VIA686B          (1 << PCI_IDSEL_VIA686B_BIT)
 
 #define PCI_ADDR(busno , devno , funno , regno)  \
-    ((((busno) << 16) & 0xff0000) + (((devno) << 11) & 0xf800) + \
-    (((funno) << 8) & 0x700) + (regno))
+    ((((busno) << 8) & 0xff00) + (((devno) << 3) & 0xf8) + \
+    (((funno) & 0x7) << 8) + (regno))
 
 typedef struct BonitoState BonitoState;
 
-- 
2.26.2

On Mon, 12 Oct 2020, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org>
>
> The PCI_ADDR() macro use generic PCI fields shifted by 8-bit.
> Rewrite it extracting the shift operation one layer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org>
> ---
> hw/pci-host/bonito.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/pci-host/bonito.c b/hw/pci-host/bonito.c
> index a99eced0657..abb3ee86769 100644
> --- a/hw/pci-host/bonito.c
> +++ b/hw/pci-host/bonito.c
> @@ -196,8 +196,8 @@ FIELD(BONGENCFG, PCIQUEUE,      12, 1)
> #define PCI_IDSEL_VIA686B          (1 << PCI_IDSEL_VIA686B_BIT)
>
> #define PCI_ADDR(busno , devno , funno , regno)  \
> -    ((((busno) << 16) & 0xff0000) + (((devno) << 11) & 0xf800) + \
> -    (((funno) << 8) & 0x700) + (regno))
> +    ((((busno) << 8) & 0xff00) + (((devno) << 3) & 0xf8) + \
> +    (((funno) & 0x7) << 8) + (regno))

Are you missing a << 8 somewhere before + (regno) or both of these are 
equally unreadable and I've missed something? This seems to be completely 
replaced by next patch so what's the point of this change?

Regards,
BALATON Zoltan

>
> typedef struct BonitoState BonitoState;
>
>

On 10/12/20 3:55 PM, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2020, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org>
>>
>> The PCI_ADDR() macro use generic PCI fields shifted by 8-bit.
>> Rewrite it extracting the shift operation one layer.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org>
>> ---
>> hw/pci-host/bonito.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/pci-host/bonito.c b/hw/pci-host/bonito.c
>> index a99eced0657..abb3ee86769 100644
>> --- a/hw/pci-host/bonito.c
>> +++ b/hw/pci-host/bonito.c
>> @@ -196,8 +196,8 @@ FIELD(BONGENCFG, PCIQUEUE,      12, 1)
>> #define PCI_IDSEL_VIA686B          (1 << PCI_IDSEL_VIA686B_BIT)
>>
>> #define PCI_ADDR(busno , devno , funno , regno)  \
>> -    ((((busno) << 16) & 0xff0000) + (((devno) << 11) & 0xf800) + \
>> -    (((funno) << 8) & 0x700) + (regno))
>> +    ((((busno) << 8) & 0xff00) + (((devno) << 3) & 0xf8) + \
>> +    (((funno) & 0x7) << 8) + (regno))
> 
> Are you missing a << 8 somewhere before + (regno) or both of these are 
> equally unreadable and I've missed something? This seems to be 
> completely replaced by next patch so what's the point of this change?

I might have missed a parenthesis somewhere indeed =)

I'm happy to merge it in the next patch, I thought it would
be easier to review but it isn't.

Thanks for reviewing!

> 
> Regards,
> BALATON Zoltan
> 
>>
>> typedef struct BonitoState BonitoState;
>>
>>