From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35848)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1Utkax-0004XC-U5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2013 16:21:10 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1Utkat-0001f2-JY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2013 16:21:07 -0400
Sender: Richard Henderson <rth7680@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <51D1E4A5.20408@twiddle.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2013 13:20:53 -0700
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1372536117-28167-1-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de>
	<1372536117-28167-5-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de>
	<51D1B7D2.8040604@twiddle.net> <51D1BB86.8020003@suse.de>
	<51D1D298.30605@twiddle.net>
	<CAFEAcA9nGB1u-5-Je9AqPWZfmT9rAfsrQ8Ub2jviQ=RDn70nTw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA9nGB1u-5-Je9AqPWZfmT9rAfsrQ8Ub2jviQ=RDn70nTw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC qom-cpu 04/41] cpu: Introduce
 CPUClass::set_pc() for gdb_set_cpu_pc()
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>, Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>, qemu-ppc <qemu-ppc@nongnu.org>, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>, "Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.iglesias@gmail.com>, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>, =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= <afaerber@suse.de>, Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>

On 07/01/2013 12:41 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> Returning to the point, what we're after here is "a type which will hold
> a guest virtual address but whose size doesn't depend on the target the
> way target_ulong does", right? My inclination is to suggest that we have
> a 'vaddr' typedef by analogy with 'hwaddr'; it seems like that might make
> code dealing with guest addresses a little more self documenting. I don't
> feel very strongly about it though so if people think it's pointless/will
> cause problems that's fine.
> 

I agree that vaddr would probably be a good name.


r~