Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.15] xen/mm: Fix build when CONFIG_HVM=n
and CONFIG_COVERAGE=y [and 1 more messages]"):
> On 01.02.2021 15:54, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Julien Grall writes ("[PATCH for-4.15] xen/mm: Fix build when CONFIG_HVM=n
> > and CONFIG_COVERAGE=y"):
...
> > Jan, can you confirm whether in your opinion this patch as originally
> > posted by Julien is *correct* as is ? In particular, Julien did not
> > intend a functional change. Have you satisfied yourself that there is
> > no functional change here ?
>
> Yes and yes.
>
> > I understand your objectiion above to relate to style or neatness,
> > rather than function. Is that correct ?
>
> Yes.
Right, thanks.
> > And that your proposed
> > additional change would have some impact whilch would have to be
> > assessed.
>
> The first of the proposed alternatives may need further
> investigation, yes. The second of the alternatives would
> shrink this patch to a 2-line one, i.e. far less code
> churn, and is not in need of any assessment afaia. In
> fact I believe this latter alternative was discussed as
> the approach to take here, before the patch was submitted.
Sorry I missed that part. I would be happy with that other approach
too, so for that approach (adding a duplicated ASSERT) is also
Release-Acked-by: Ian Jackson <i...@xenproject.org>
I'm not a huge fan of code duplication, in general. I suggest that if
the ASSERT is duplicated it might be worth leaving comment(s) by each
one pointing to the other.
Ian.
