* Andy Lutomirski <l...@amacapital.net> wrote:

> That’s why I suggested “read,” in lowercase, for reads.  Other than 
> that, most of the unset bits are uninteresting. An OOPS is so likely to 
> be a kernel fault that it’s barely worth mentioning, and I even added a 
> whole separate diagnostic for user oopses.  Similarly, I don’t think we 
> need to remind the reader that an oops wasn’t an SGX error or that it 
> wasn’t a PK error.  So I think my idea highlights the interesting bits 
> and avoids distraction from the uninteresting bits.

Ok - all good points.

Thanks,

        Ingo

Reply via email to