From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58486) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ggX8P-00040j-BT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2019 10:48:13 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ggX8O-0002OF-PH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2019 10:48:13 -0500 Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 16:48:01 +0100 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20190107164801.32e9d6dc.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <5C2F6ED2.33D0D1.16460@m12-13.163.com> References: <20190103151612.51399-1-liq3ea@163.com> <20190104151005.42b6f111.cohuck@redhat.com> <5C2F6ED2.33D0D1.16460@m12-13.163.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] s390: avoid potential null dereference ins390_pcihost_unplug() List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Li Qiang Cc: "walling@linux.ibm.com" , "rth@twiddle.net" , "david@redhat.com" , "pasic@linux.ibm.com" , "borntraeger@de.ibm.com" , "qemu-s390x@nongnu.org" , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , "peter.maydell@linaro.org" On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 22:33:51 +0800 Li Qiang wrote: > What do you think of =E2=80=98g_assert_not_reached();=E2=80=99. For examp= le: >=20 > else { > g_assert_not_reached(); > } Sounds good. But please return anyway in the unplug case, so that the code is fine if asserts have been configured out.