Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] Documentation for MPX.

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: "Tedeschi, Walfred" <walfred.tedeschi@intel.com>
> CC: "palves@redhat.com" <palves@redhat.com>, "gdb-patches@sourceware.org"
> 	<gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 09:41:39 +0000
> 
> About the "Architecture": You have made a comment on another place about Raw values/Architecture values. That was changed. The line is this one:
>      +This way the raw value can be accessed via bnd0raw@dots{}bnd3raw.  Any 
>      +change on bnd0@dots{}bnd3 or bnd0raw@dots{}bnd3raw is reflect on its 
>      +counterpart.
> Before:
>     +This way the architecture value can be accessed via bnd0raw...bnd3raw.   
>     +Any change on bnd0..bnd3 or bnd0raw...bnd3raw is reflect on its 
>     +counterpart.  When displaying

OK, but I meant to use "raw" everywhere, not just in that part.

> I will add here a list of changes in V2:
> 1. Added @cindex for MPX and @def for MPX.
> 2.Exchanged "..." by @dots{}
> 3.Fix typo on "Architecture registers...." as mentioned.
> 4.Example is fixed (using "@{"  for "{" and  "@}" for "}").

Right.

> About the phrase:
> >+Architecture registers @samp{BND0} through @samp{BND3} are 
> > +represented in @value{GDBN} as @samp{bnd0raw} through @samp{bnd3raw}. 
> 
> My intention was to emphasize that the BND register, as presented on Intel manual, is represented in GDB by bndraw.  Therefore the use of " Architecture registers".
> Since we have already defined that BND are the architecture register we could omit the "Architecture Registers on the phrase writing like:
> 
> >+@samp{BND0} through @samp{BND3} are 
> > +represented in @value{GDBN} as @samp{bnd0raw} through @samp{bnd3raw}.
> 
> What do you think?

Fine with me, thanks.