Some minor nits below.
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 17:54:09 +0300, Lluís Vilanova wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Lluís Vilanova <vilan...@ac.upc.edu>
> ---
> +/**
> + * BreakpointHitType:
> + * @BH_MISS: No hit
> + * @BH_HIT_INSN: Hit, but continue translating instruction
> + * @BH_HIT_TB: Hit, stop translating TB
> + *
> + * How to react to a breakpoint hit.
> + */
> +typedef enum BreakpointHitType {
> + BH_MISS,
> + BH_HIT_INSN,
> + BH_HIT_TB,
> +} BreakpointHitType;
BH_MISS reads out loud to "Breakpoint Hit Miss"; that's quite counterintuitive.
Similarly for the others (e.g. "breakpoint Hit Hit -- ??".
Can we just do BP_{MISS,HIT,etc}? Thinking about it, perhaps BP_NONE is
better than BP_MISS.
(snip)
> +/**
> + * DisasContextBase:
> + * @tb: Translation block for this disassembly.
> + * @pc_first: Address of first guest instruction in this TB.
> + * @pc_next: Address of next guest instruction in this TB (current during
> + * disassembly).
> + * @num_insns: Number of translated instructions (including current).
> + * @singlestep_enabled: "Hardware" single stepping enabled.
> + *
> + * Architecture-agnostic disassembly context.
> + */
> +typedef struct DisasContextBase {
> + TranslationBlock *tb;
> + target_ulong pc_first;
> + target_ulong pc_next;
> + DisasJumpType jmp_type;
> + unsigned int num_insns;
> + bool singlestep_enabled;
> +} DisasContextBase;
- @pc_next: I'd stick with @pc, it's shorter, it's everywhere already, and
with the documentation it's very clear what it is for.
- @jmp_type: missing doc :-)
Thanks,
E.
