From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57496)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1aL6wY-0004Ls-76
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 05:21:50 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1aL6wU-0001u2-7Z
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 05:21:50 -0500
Received: from mail-wm0-x230.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::230]:34893)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1aL6wU-0001tw-0m
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 05:21:46 -0500
Received: by mail-wm0-x230.google.com with SMTP id r129so44857906wmr.0
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 02:21:45 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <569CBCB1.5040004@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:21:37 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] defining VIXL_DEBUG?
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>

I've gotten four new Coverity reports in libvixl.  All of them are
caused by Coverity assuming that LaneSizeInBitsFromFormat can return 0.
 The actual code in the function is

    default: VIXL_UNREACHABLE(); return 0;

so this is obviously a false positive.  Defining VIXL_DEBUG would cause
VIXL_UNREACHABLE() to call abort().  Any opinion about whether/where to
do so?

Thanks,

Paolo