From: Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org>

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.

Reviewed-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <alex.ben...@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org>
Message-Id: <20200213032223.14643-2-richard.hender...@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <laur...@vivier.eu>
---
 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 60d797d5941f..49ecc23104c9 100644
--- a/target/i386/cpu.h
+++ b/target/i386/cpu.h
@@ -1001,9 +1001,8 @@ 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
-- 
2.25.1


Reply via email to