On 9/27/15 00:06, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 25 September 2015 at 21:10,  <gang.chen.5...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> From: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5...@gmail.com>
>>
>> They content several new macro members, also contents TARGET_N*.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5...@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  linux-user/syscall_defs.h | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>>  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/linux-user/syscall_defs.h b/linux-user/syscall_defs.h
>> index cdc8db4..6bec3f2 100644
>> --- a/linux-user/syscall_defs.h
>> +++ b/linux-user/syscall_defs.h
>> @@ -736,14 +736,21 @@ typedef struct target_siginfo {
>>  /*
>>   * SIGILL si_codes
>>   */
>> -#define TARGET_ILL_ILLOPC      (1)     /* illegal opcode */
>> -#define TARGET_ILL_ILLOPN      (2)     /* illegal operand */
>> -#define TARGET_ILL_ILLADR      (3)     /* illegal addressing mode */
>> -#define TARGET_ILL_ILLTRP      (4)     /* illegal trap */
>> -#define TARGET_ILL_PRVOPC      (5)     /* privileged opcode */
>> -#define TARGET_ILL_PRVREG      (6)     /* privileged register */
>> -#define TARGET_ILL_COPROC      (7)     /* coprocessor error */
>> -#define TARGET_ILL_BADSTK      (8)     /* internal stack error */
>> +#define TARGET_ILL_ILLOPC       (1)     /* illegal opcode */
>> +#define TARGET_ILL_ILLOPN       (2)     /* illegal operand */
>> +#define TARGET_ILL_ILLADR       (3)     /* illegal addressing mode */
>> +#define TARGET_ILL_ILLTRP       (4)     /* illegal trap */
>> +#define TARGET_ILL_PRVOPC       (5)     /* privileged opcode */
>> +#define TARGET_ILL_PRVREG       (6)     /* privileged register */
>> +#define TARGET_ILL_COPROC       (7)     /* coprocessor error */
>> +#define TARGET_ILL_BADSTK       (8)     /* internal stack error */
>> +#ifdef TARGET_TILEGX
>> +#define TARGET_ILL_DBLFLT       (9)     /* double fault */
>> +#define TARGET_ILL_HARDWALL     (10)    /* user networks hardwall violation 
>> */
>> +#define TARGET_NSIGILL          10
>> +#else
>> +#define TARGET_NSIGILL          8
>> +#endif
> 
> Please don't change lines which haven't actually changed;
> it makes it hard to see what has been added.
> 

"scripts/checkpatch.pl" will check '\t', so when we add new lines, we
have to consider about it. And all related lines (at least in a "group")
have to changed, too.

I guess, I need mention about it in comments (but I did not originally).

So for me, please add related comments for it when you apply the patch
(if it passes review). If it is necessary to send patch v2, please let
me know.


Thanks
-- 
Chen Gang

Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed

Reply via email to