Re: [PATCH v14 02/26] target/loongarch: Add core definition

[gaosong]

Hi,

On 2022/1/9 下午5:25, WANG Xuerui wrote:

> > +
> >         
> >         +const char * const fregnames[32] = {
> >         
> >         +    "f0", "f1", "f2", "f3", "f4", "f5", "f6", "f7",
> >         
> >         +    "f8", "f9", "f10", "f11", "f12", "f13", "f14", "f15",
> >         
> >         +    "f16", "f17", "f18", "f19", "f20", "f21", "f22", "f23",
> >         
> >         +    "f24", "f25", "f26", "f27", "f28", "f29", "f30", "f31",
> >         
> >         +};
> >         
> >         +
> >         
> >         +static const char * const excp_names[EXCP_LAST + 1] = {
> >         
> >         +    [EXCP_SYSCALL] = "Syscall",
> >         
> >         +    [EXCP_BREAK] = "Break",
> >         
> >         +    [EXCP_INE] = "Instruction Non-existent",
> >         
> >       
>       Nit: "Instruction Non-Existent" (or is there any authoritative
>       source for this spelling? the English translation of the manual?)
>     
I must admit that your English is really good, But 'Instruction Non-existent' is what you pointed out in v7.  I have a history [1], 
[1] https://patchew.org/QEMU/1634561247-25499-1-git-send-email-gaosong@loongson.cn/1634561247-25499-3-git-send-email-gaosong@loongson.cn/
> +static const char * const excp_names[EXCP_LAST + 1] = {
> +    [EXCP_ADE] = "Address error",
> +    [EXCP_SYSCALL] = "Syscall",
> +    [EXCP_BREAK] = "Break",
> +    [EXCP_INE] = "Inst. Not Exist",
Nit: "Instruction Non-existent", no need to shorten "instruction" like 
this IMO; no other similar usages exist so this would not be consistent.
In any case thank you for your other suggestions.

Thanks
Song