Re: [PATCH 1/3] target/i386: Renumber EXCP_SYSCALL

2020-01-15 Thread Alex Bennée
Richard Henderson writes: > 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. > > Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson

Re: [PATCH 1/3] target/i386: Renumber EXCP_SYSCALL

2020-01-14 Thread Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
On 1/14/20 10:09 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: 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. Signed-off-by: Richard

[PATCH 1/3] target/i386: Renumber EXCP_SYSCALL

2020-01-14 Thread Richard Henderson
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. Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson --- target/i386/cpu.h | 5 ++--- 1 file