On 09/01/15 12:10, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 09.01.15 at 12:45, <t...@xen.org> wrote: >> At 11:24 +0000 on 09 Jan (1420799087), Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 09.01.15 at 12:18, <t...@xen.org> wrote: >>>>>> + default: >>>>>> + xfree(buf); >>>>>> + ASSERT(!buf); >>>> looks dodgy... >>> In which way? The "default" is supposed to be unreachable, and sits >>> in the else branch to an if(!buf), i.e. in a release build we'll correctly >>> free the buffer, while in a debug build the ASSERT() will trigger. >> Oh I see. Can you please use ASSERT(0) for that? > I sincerely dislike ASSERT(0), but if that's the only way to get > the patch accepted... > > Jan >
Perhaps introducing ASSERT_UNREACHABLE() as an alternative which is more obvious in nature than both ASSERT(!buf) and ASSERT(0) ? ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
