On 2/9/2016 2:12 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 09.02.16 at 12:52, <cz...@bitdefender.com> wrote:
On 2/9/2016 1:19 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.02.16 at 17:57, <cz...@bitdefender.com> wrote:
This patch merges almost identical functions hvm_event_int3
and hvm_event_single_step into a single function called
hvm_event_software_breakpoint.
Except that "software breakpoint" is rather questionable a name
here, considering that on x86 this is basically an alias for "int3".
If it was "breakpoint", one might argue (see the other responses
you've got) that breakpoint event resulting from debug register
settings might then be candidates to come here too.
Yeah..should I then:
* keep both functions and only rename hvm_event_int3 to
hvm_event_software_breakpoint
I actually think that the intention of folding two almost identical
functions is a good one. I'm merely suggesting to think of a
better name - perhaps just "breakpoint" or "debug event"?
SGTM. I'll change it to hvm_event_breakpoint then.
Corneliu.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
