[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <X+oTAiMqfoDe1GBg@google.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 09:16:50 -0800
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 01/19] x86/insn: Rename insn_decode() to
insn_decode_regs()
On Wed, Dec 23, 2020, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
>
> Rename insn_decode() to insn_decode_regs() to denote that it receives
> regs as param and free the name for a more generic version of the
> function.
Can we add a preposition in there, e.g. insn_decode_from_regs() or
insn_decode_with_regs()? For me, "decode_regs" means "decode the register
operands of the instruction".
Powered by blists - more mailing lists