From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2845C433F5 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 15:22:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:46072 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n6wVM-0005WP-PG for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 10:22:40 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:34868) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n6wLM-000361-IV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 10:12:22 -0500 Received: from mail.xen0n.name ([115.28.160.31]:43920 helo=mailbox.box.xen0n.name) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n6wLJ-0005fy-5d for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 10:12:20 -0500 Received: from [192.168.9.172] (unknown [101.88.31.179]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailbox.box.xen0n.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4A11B600FB; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 23:11:59 +0800 (CST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=xen0n.name; s=mail; t=1641827519; bh=kRfW26g/qgQtbqMIeYPOtSM2fP/YZ4OYhhMyOPuZlxI=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=C0IrR8XPSx9ze4zk3ils5y8leNjZmZAmyfukmgjN/zxAYN832Wq+e6jYXX2N8KbqO SOTO5MLJAE5XUDPgA3dBCehLCJaUhqMxO4hMzq1RbeFiFrEfSYgjyHs5MxlI5lzGEz iHp2DXfALha4NTE8C++BFmotJ4RdUo4hn0NuCafE= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------JMpGovTZLMvWom0tSBIE0Ic5" Message-ID: <7e47cd41-b62f-161f-a8f1-b8a7b17acd15@xen0n.name> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 23:11:58 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:97.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/97.0a1 Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 02/26] target/loongarch: Add core definition Content-Language: en-US To: gaosong References: <20220106094200.1801206-1-gaosong@loongson.cn> <20220106094200.1801206-3-gaosong@loongson.cn> From: WANG Xuerui In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=115.28.160.31; envelope-from=i.qemu@xen0n.name; helo=mailbox.box.xen0n.name X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Xiaojuan Yang , Richard Henderson , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------JMpGovTZLMvWom0tSBIE0Ic5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi, On 1/10/22 21:00, gaosong wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2022/1/9 下午5:25, WANG Xuerui wrote: >>> + >>> +const char * const fregnames[32] = { >>> +    "f0", "f1", "f2", "f3", "f4", "f5", "f6", "f7", >>> +    "f8", "f9", "f10", "f11", "f12", "f13", "f14", "f15", >>> +    "f16", "f17", "f18", "f19", "f20", "f21", "f22", "f23", >>> +    "f24", "f25", "f26", "f27", "f28", "f29", "f30", "f31", >>> +}; >>> + >>> +static const char * const excp_names[EXCP_LAST + 1] = { >>> +    [EXCP_SYSCALL] = "Syscall", >>> +    [EXCP_BREAK] = "Break", >>> +    [EXCP_INE] = "Instruction Non-existent", >> Nit: "Instruction Non-Existent" (or is there any authoritative source >> for this spelling? the English translation of the manual?) > I must admit that your English is really good, But 'Instruction Non-existent' is what you pointed out in v7.  I have a history [1], > [1]https://patchew.org/QEMU/1634561247-25499-1-git-send-email-gaosong@loongson.cn/1634561247-25499-3-git-send-email-gaosong@loongson.cn/ > > +static const char * const excp_names[EXCP_LAST + 1] = { > > + [EXCP_ADE] = "Address error", > > + [EXCP_SYSCALL] = "Syscall", > > + [EXCP_BREAK] = "Break", > > + [EXCP_INE] = "Inst. Not Exist", > Nit: "Instruction Non-existent", no need to shorten "instruction" like > this IMO; no other similar usages exist so this would not be consistent. > In any case thank you for your other suggestions. Well, I do make my mistakes sometimes, and I'll explain a bit: in the former review what I noticed was the broken English, and I pointed that out, but meanwhile I've forgotten I had done that, and why I didn't write "Non-Existent" was because the "Address error" wasn't in full Title Case. However, in this revision, what I noticed is the inconsistent casing (with EXCP_ADE removed, all other strings are in Title Case now), hence the reply. No need to go full self-defense over this; I think what matters after all is just consistency. > > Thanks > Song --------------JMpGovTZLMvWom0tSBIE0Ic5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hi,

On 1/10/22 21:00, gaosong wrote:

Hi,

On 2022/1/9 下午5:25, WANG Xuerui wrote:
+
+const char * const fregnames[32] = {
+    "f0", "f1", "f2", "f3", "f4", "f5", "f6", "f7",
+    "f8", "f9", "f10", "f11", "f12", "f13", "f14", "f15",
+    "f16", "f17", "f18", "f19", "f20", "f21", "f22", "f23",
+    "f24", "f25", "f26", "f27", "f28", "f29", "f30", "f31",
+};
+
+static const char * const excp_names[EXCP_LAST + 1] = {
+    [EXCP_SYSCALL] = "Syscall",
+    [EXCP_BREAK] = "Break",
+    [EXCP_INE] = "Instruction Non-existent",
Nit: "Instruction Non-Existent" (or is there any authoritative source for this spelling? the English translation of the manual?) 
I must admit that your English is really good, But 'Instruction Non-existent' is what you pointed out in v7.  I have a history [1], 

[1] https://patchew.org/QEMU/1634561247-25499-1-git-send-email-gaosong@loongson.cn/1634561247-25499-3-git-send-email-gaosong@loongson.cn/
> +static const char * const excp_names[EXCP_LAST + 1] = {
> +    [EXCP_ADE] = "Address error",
> +    [EXCP_SYSCALL] = "Syscall",
> +    [EXCP_BREAK] = "Break",
> +    [EXCP_INE] = "Inst. Not Exist",
Nit: "Instruction Non-existent", no need to shorten "instruction" like 
this IMO; no other similar usages exist so this would not be consistent.
In any case thank you for your other suggestions.

Well, I do make my mistakes sometimes, and I'll explain a bit: in the former review what I noticed was the broken English, and I pointed that out, but meanwhile I've forgotten I had done that, and why I didn't write "Non-Existent" was because the "Address error" wasn't in full Title Case. However, in this revision, what I noticed is the inconsistent casing (with EXCP_ADE removed, all other strings are in Title Case now), hence the reply.

No need to go full self-defense over this; I think what matters after all is just consistency.


Thanks
Song
--------------JMpGovTZLMvWom0tSBIE0Ic5--