On 27 January 2015 at 19:49, Greg Bellows <greg.bell...@linaro.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> > wrote: >> g_assert_not_reached(), but it didn't seem worth cluttering >> the switch with a bunch of extra labels just to assert that >> they weren't reachable. >> > > I see how it could clutter things, but given that the routine is generic we > probably should just like we do in regime_el().
Not a big deal, so I'll add them, but the routine isn't generic -- it's purely a local utility routine for the benefit of the get_phys_addr family of functions and not intended to be called from elsewhere. -- PMM
