From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] x86: hvm events: merge 2 functions into
	1
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 05:12:32 -0700
Message-ID: <56B9E5C002000078000D005A@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
References: <1454950682-9459-1-git-send-email-czuzu@bitdefender.com>
	<1454950682-9459-3-git-send-email-czuzu@bitdefender.com>
	<56B9D96602000078000CFFB3@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
	<56B9D311.3070106@bitdefender.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <56B9D311.3070106@bitdefender.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Corneliu ZUZU <czuzu@bitdefender.com>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>, Tamas K Lengyel <tamas@tklengyel.com>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@citrix.com>, Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

>>> On 09.02.16 at 12:52, <czuzu@bitdefender.com> wrote:
> On 2/9/2016 1:19 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 08.02.16 at 17:57, <czuzu@bitdefender.com> wrote:
>>> This patch merges almost identical functions hvm_event_int3
>>> and hvm_event_single_step into a single function called
>>> hvm_event_software_breakpoint.
>> Except that "software breakpoint" is rather questionable a name
>> here, considering that on x86 this is basically an alias for "int3".
>> If it was "breakpoint", one might argue (see the other responses
>> you've got) that breakpoint event resulting from debug register
>> settings might then be candidates to come here too.
> 
> Yeah..should I then:
> * keep both functions and only rename hvm_event_int3 to 
> hvm_event_software_breakpoint

I actually think that the intention of folding two almost identical
functions is a good one. I'm merely suggesting to think of a
better name - perhaps just "breakpoint" or "debug event"?