From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16850 invoked by alias); 29 Mar 2011 11:11:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 16842 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Mar 2011 11:11:11 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 11:11:05 +0000 Received: (qmail 1508 invoked from network); 29 Mar 2011 11:11:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.102?) (yao@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 29 Mar 2011 11:11:04 -0000 Message-ID: <4D91BE41.2010107@codesourcery.com> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 12:21:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110223 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Rewrite the codes for opcode 0x0f01 and add more instructions support References: <1255182393-15292-1-git-send-email-freephp@gmail.com> <4AD28E95.1050404@vmware.com> <7d77a27d0910111921v13a8e8acpb98c29a9aa72ed8@mail.gmail.com> <4C929A9C.1050601@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-03/txt/msg01165.txt.bz2 On 03/29/2011 06:11 PM, Jiang Jilin wrote: I am not the people to approve this patch. Some comments on code format and indent. > 2011-03-29 Jiang Jilin There should be a newline here. Please reference other changelog entries. > * i386-tdep.c (i386_process_record): Rewrite the codes for > opcode 0x0f01 and add more instructions support > + switch (reg_rm) > + { > + /* vmcall */ > + case 0x01: > + /* vmlaunch */ Looks like there are two extra spaces in front of your comment. Please remove them. There are several instances of this problem in your patch. > + > + /* We have to store at least (4 + 2 = 6) bytes, > + or (8 + 2 = 10) bytes at most. */ According to my limited English knowledge, it should be "6 bytes at least *and* 10 bytes at most". > + if (i386_record_lea_modrm_addr (&ir, &tmpu64)) > + return -1; -- Yao (齐尧)