[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <SA1PR11MB673406B8B43E18F0BD11C8DBA8A89@SA1PR11MB6734.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Fri, 24 Feb 2023 16:34:36 +0000
From:   "Li, Xin3" <xin3.li@...el.com>
To:     "andrew.cooper3@...rix.com" <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Christopherson,, Sean" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v3 15/32] x86/fred: make unions for the cs and ss
 fields in struct pt_regs
> > +	union {
> > +		unsigned long  csl; /* CS + any fields above it */
> 
> I guess that CSL here is supposed to mean cs long, but CSL (Current Stack Level) is a
> new term in the FRED spec which isn't this.
Good catch!
> 
> This causes changes such as the final hunk in patch 27 to read incorrectly, despite
> being technically correct.
> 
> cs_slot would be much clearer in code, but tbh, even cs_l would be better than the
> version without an underscore.
cs_slot sounds a good term unless someone comes up with a better one.
> 
> And obviously, whatever is done here should be mirrored for ss.
Probably ss_slot then.
  Xin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists