From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35804) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dkSVI-0000S7-Nf for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 06:03:22 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dkSVH-0006Ja-Ob for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 06:03:16 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54496) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dkSVH-0006If-JY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 06:03:15 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 12:03:05 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20170823120305.722d2de6.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20170821091614.28251-1-cohuck@redhat.com> <20170821091614.28251-10-cohuck@redhat.com> <20170821141353.32a1242c.cohuck@redhat.com> <91e5cbdf-9d91-fc7f-3fb5-3727d73b1419@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 09/10] s390x/kvm: msi route fixup for non-pci List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Halil Pasic Cc: Thomas Huth , zyimin@linux.vnet.ibm.com, david@redhat.com, pmorel@linux.vnet.ibm.com, agraf@suse.de, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com On Mon, 21 Aug 2017 17:30:58 +0200 Halil Pasic wrote: > On 08/21/2017 05:17 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: > > On 21.08.2017 17:10, Halil Pasic wrote: > > [...] > >> The situation is just complicated by the fact that there is code which > >> relies on assert(true) asserting for correctness (e.g. virtio goes so far > >> to make builds with normal asserts disabled fail). Thus for me it's hard > >> to assume that the assertion is guaranteed to be disabled in production. > > > > FYI: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-08/msg03608.html > > > > Thomas > > > > Thanks, I've missed that. With that assumed it becomes either > assert(false) or return -ENODEV but not both. > > Regards, > Halil > Thinking about this some more, this seems to be completely covered within the next statement: - For builds with pci completely disabled, we'll end up with NULL in both s390_get_phb() and s390_pci_find_dev_by_idx() and return -ENODEV. - If only the zpci facility bit is not set, we'll hit the assert in s390_get_phb(). Without an error message, there does not really seem to be additional value (other than failing explicitly), so I'll drop this patch. (Yeah, deja vu...)