From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:55944) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TXqTo-0004JP-BB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 04:38:59 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TXqTl-00015k-8l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 04:38:56 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:9454) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TXqTl-00015g-1M for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 04:38:53 -0500 Message-ID: <50A0C3A5.6020100@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 10:38:45 +0100 From: Gerd Hoffmann MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <509E0603.5060709@wiesinger.com> <201211101754.36092.marex@denx.de> In-Reply-To: <201211101754.36092.marex@denx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] ui/vnc.c: Fix crash with VNC List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Marek Vasut Cc: Gerhard Wiesinger , Peter Maydell , Anthony Liguori , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Hi, >> I'd go for clipping rather than asserting too (no crash) in all layers >> as a defensive approach (console.c/vnc.c). > > Won't that be an unnecessary slowdown? Thats why I tend to prefer assert for additional sanity checks. They help finding bugs, but can optionally be compiled out. But adding new asserts just before a release isn't the smartest move indeed, maybe clip now and turn the checks into asserts once 1.3 is out of the door. cheers, Gerd