From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55675) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dMbNf-0006O5-SP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:40:48 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dMbNd-0004Ur-Nd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:40:47 -0400 Received: from roura.ac.upc.edu ([147.83.33.10]:57379 helo=roura.ac.upc.es) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dMbNd-0004Q2-8S for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:40:45 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Llu=C3=ADs_Vilanova?= References: <149727922719.28532.11985025310576184920.stgit@frigg.lan> <149727924970.28532.9346819516051209538.stgit@frigg.lan> <20170615221911.GB26408@flamenco> Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 17:20:25 +0300 In-Reply-To: <20170615221911.GB26408@flamenco> (Emilio G. Cota's message of "Thu, 15 Jun 2017 18:19:11 -0400") Message-ID: <87wp89e5sm.fsf@frigg.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 3/6] target: [tcg] Add generic translation framework List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Emilio G. Cota" Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Richard Henderson , Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Peter Crosthwaite Emilio G Cota writes: > Some minor nits below. > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 17:54:09 +0300, Llu=C3=ADs Vilanova wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Llu=C3=ADs Vilanova >> --- >> +/** >> + * BreakpointHitType: >> + * @BH_MISS: No hit >> + * @BH_HIT_INSN: Hit, but continue translating instruction >> + * @BH_HIT_TB: Hit, stop translating TB >> + * >> + * How to react to a breakpoint hit. >> + */ >> +typedef enum BreakpointHitType { >> + BH_MISS, >> + BH_HIT_INSN, >> + BH_HIT_TB, >> +} BreakpointHitType; > BH_MISS reads out loud to "Breakpoint Hit Miss"; that's quite counterintu= itive. > Similarly for the others (e.g. "breakpoint Hit Hit -- ??". > Can we just do BP_{MISS,HIT,etc}? Thinking about it, perhaps BP_NONE is > better than BP_MISS. [...] Will do. Cheers, Lluis