>>> On 08.09.17 at 16:41, <roger....@citrix.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 09:38:11AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >>> On 14.08.17 at 16:28, <roger....@citrix.com> wrote: >> > + /* >> > + * At this point we have the following layout: >> > + * >> > + * Note that this refers to the position of the variables, >> > + * but the value has already changed from the one given at >> > + * initialization time because write tests have been performed. >> > + * >> > + * 32 24 16 8 0 >> > + * +-----+-----+-----+-----+ >> > + * | r0 | 0 >> > + * +-----+-----+-----+-----+ >> > + * | r7 | r6 | r5 |/////| 32 >> > + * +-----+-----+-----+-----| >> > + * |///////////////////////| 64 >> > + * +-----------+-----------+ >> > + * |///////////| r12 | 96 >> > + * +-----------+-----------+ >> > + * ... >> > + * / = empty. >> >> Maybe better "unwritten"? > > I've been thinking about this, and I'm not sure unwritten is better, > in fact the test will write to this registers, it's just that there's > no backing handlers so writes will be discarded and reads will return > ~0. > > So I think "empty" or maybe "unhandled" is more descriptive.
"unhandled" then please - registers can't possibly be empty imo. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel