Hi Mathias,
thanks for your patch.
Minor nitpick:
On 21.12.2010 16:17, Mathias Krause wrote:
(prot & 0xfffff800) + (((((prot & 0x7fc) >> 2) + 1) << 10) - 1));
This one looks a bit odd. How about
(prot & 0xfffff800) + ((((prot & 0x7fc) >> 2) << 10) | 0x3ff);
Looks good otherwise.
Regards, Carl-Daniel