Re: [PATCH 1/3] target/i386: Renumber EXCP_SYSCALL

[Alex Bennée]

Richard Henderson <address@hidden> writes:

> We are not short of numbers for EXCP_*.  There is no need to confuse things
> by having EXCP_VMEXIT and EXCP_SYSCALL overlap, even though the former is
> only used for system mode and the latter is only used for user mode.
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <address@hidden>

Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <address@hidden>

> ---
>  target/i386/cpu.h | 5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/target/i386/cpu.h b/target/i386/cpu.h
> index 594326a794..164d038d1f 100644
> --- a/target/i386/cpu.h
> +++ b/target/i386/cpu.h
> @@ -998,9 +998,8 @@ typedef uint64_t FeatureWordArray[FEATURE_WORDS];
>  #define EXCP11_ALGN  17
>  #define EXCP12_MCHK  18
>  
> -#define EXCP_SYSCALL    0x100 /* only happens in user only emulation
> -                                 for syscall instruction */
> -#define EXCP_VMEXIT     0x100
> +#define EXCP_VMEXIT     0x100 /* only for system emulation */
> +#define EXCP_SYSCALL    0x101 /* only for user emulation */
>  
>  /* i386-specific interrupt pending bits.  */
>  #define CPU_INTERRUPT_POLL      CPU_INTERRUPT_TGT_EXT_1


-- 
Alex Bennée