[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VfqFAgPbHDLBdDF_VRFRoGuBBMtA0HuOeDTZtNgFe-8yQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 19:06:26 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
sean.j.christopherson@...el.com, nhorman@...hat.com,
npmccallum@...hat.com, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 04/13] x86/sgx: Architectural structures
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 7:04 PM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:
>
> On 09/03/2018 06:16 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >> + EBLOCK = 0x9,
> >> + EPA = 0xA,
> >> + EWB = 0xB,
> >> + ETRACK = 0xC,
> >> + EAUG = 0xD,
> >> + EMODPR = 0xE,
> >> + EMODT = 0xF,
> >> +};
> > Hmm... This E prefix confuses me with (system wide) error codes. Has
> > it been discussed before? If so, can you point on the conclusion why
> > the current format is good?
>
> Making them SGX_EWHATEVER isn't a horrible idea.
+1 here. Namespace will not shadow SDM naming scheme.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists