[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/7] x86: hvm events: merge 2 functions into 1


  • To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
  • From: Corneliu ZUZU <czuzu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 14:24:22 +0200
  • Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, Tamas K Lengyel <tamas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>, Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Comment: DomainKeys? See http://domainkeys.sourceforge.net/
  • Delivery-date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 12:24:28 +0000
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=bitdefender.com; b=JkjOsP4RPtVwbBpjutYuq/D3flWY9gkGV/8PPobB43Nqn4zvEbvCIAUD2DsLd7WmGbNOc3uJdrFtUTO8QZUiVBjFUFWjkMPuOJvgfrH/nYz3QnzBg0QVLSsWinYI580b4UonEQcECGKA2aKBlxw5RvInL6ydiGq3LTpEBr/Kr36Fu+S6D+EeB0e0/Gx66g7gMIaJhonWYG8WPqZmecusICusPsdTGu2QV1S6t/Xd+VGswwUl54UOSN7znsoCRKRnp43dpGTPK27VP49leOtSVK2rrJZHk9onE6EYGKF2pa/j2aZ4du/NnFXX8mGyQHQXnWcvtDLwfjaSsBVgfm7w7Q==; h=Received:Received:Received:Received:Received:Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Message-ID:Date:User-Agent:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-BitDefender-Scanner:X-BitDefender-Spam:X-BitDefender-SpamStamp:X-BitDefender-CF-Stamp;
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>

On 2/9/2016 2:12 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 09.02.16 at 12:52, <czuzu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2/9/2016 1:19 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.02.16 at 17:57, <czuzu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This patch merges almost identical functions hvm_event_int3
and hvm_event_single_step into a single function called
hvm_event_software_breakpoint.
Except that "software breakpoint" is rather questionable a name
here, considering that on x86 this is basically an alias for "int3".
If it was "breakpoint", one might argue (see the other responses
you've got) that breakpoint event resulting from debug register
settings might then be candidates to come here too.
Yeah..should I then:
* keep both functions and only rename hvm_event_int3 to
hvm_event_software_breakpoint
I actually think that the intention of folding two almost identical
functions is a good one. I'm merely suggesting to think of a
better name - perhaps just "breakpoint" or "debug event"?



SGTM. I'll change it to hvm_event_breakpoint then.

Corneliu.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.