On 09/30/2016 05:24 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: >>>> 3 comments added in same file to identify cases in a switch. >>> >>> This should be a separate patch, because it is unrelated to the >>> tagged address stuff. >> >> As part of that same conversation you suggested adding these >> comments rather than making the changes: >> If we can assert, or failing that have a comment in the place >> that would be modified anyway for 56 bit addresses then that >> ought to catch the future case I think. > > Yes, I still think this. What does it have to do with adding > "SVC", "HVC", etc comments to the switch cases? Those have > nothing to do with tagged addresses or 56 bit VAs, and should > not be in this patch (though I don't object to them inherently). > > thanks > -- PMM
Sorry, moving too fast and didn't look at which comments you were referring to. I'll drop them. -Tom
