On 10/12/2017 01:44 PM, Halil Pasic wrote:
>
>
> On 10/12/2017 08:58 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 10.10.2017 13:41, Halil Pasic wrote:
[..]
>> So yes, please don't do a "typedef unsigned int IOInstEnding" either. I
>> think the best match for QEMU would be a
>>
>> typedef enum IOInstEnding {
>> CC_...,
>> CC_...,
>> CC_...,
>> CC_...
>> } IOInstEnding;
>>
>
> I also prefer this over #define NAME val.
>
@Conny @Thomas
I'm almost done with v3, but I've realized we did not agree on the
names for the enum constants, so before posting something to ugly
again, I would like to inquire your opinion.
My current version of the enum is the following (but I can easily change
to whatever you like with sed):
+/*
+ * IO instructions conclude according this. Currently we have only
+ * cc codes. Valid values are 0,1,2,3 and the generic semantic for IO
instructions
+ * is described briefly. For more details consult the PoP.
+ */
+typedef enum IOInstEnding {
+ IOINST_CC_0 = 0, /* produced expected result */
+ IOINST_CC_1 = 1, /* status conditions were present, or alternate result */
+ IOINST_CC_2 = 2, /* ineffective, busy with previously initiated function */
+ IOINST_CC_3 = 3 /* ineffective, not operational */
+} IOInstEnding;
+
Alternatives I had in mind are IOINST_CC_0_EXPECTED,
IOINST_CC_1_STATUS_PRESENT,
IOINST_CC_2_BUSY, IOINST_CC_3_NOT_OPERATIONAL or the same without the numerical
code (e.g. just IONIST_CC_EXPECTED).
Regards,
Halil
[..]
