From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: He Chen Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/3] x86: add domctl cmd to set/get CDP code/data CBM Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:24:20 +0800 Message-ID: <20151016082420.GA10904@HE> References: <1444726426-10567-1-git-send-email-he.chen@linux.intel.com> <1444726426-10567-3-git-send-email-he.chen@linux.intel.com> <20151015145716.GA19658@aepfle.de> <20151015151046.GC32638@zion.uk.xensource.com> <561FE6B902000078000AB84A@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Zn0JF-0006mA-CW for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 08:24:17 +0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <561FE6B902000078000AB84A@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Olaf Hering , keir@xen.org, ian.campbell@citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com, chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, wei.liu2@citrix.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 09:47:37AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > Ah, yes, in cases like this it should always be followed by return > (or whatever else is suitable). Sorry for not having spotted this > during review. > Sorry for this bug. Is it proper to fix this bug by just adding a return after ASSERT_UNREACHABLE? Or do some changes in ASSERT_UNREACHABLE?