On 4 September 2014 20:29, Jan Vesely <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 16:05 +0200, Martin Decky wrote:
> > > I think checking the queue pointer for null and refusing transfer would
> > > be the right solution here.
> >
> > Why not just keep the workaround there, even if it goes beyond the
> > specification? I mean, it is the classical robustness principle: Be
> > conservative in what you send, be liberal in what you accept.
>
> I don't see how it would improve robustness more than checking for NULL
> queue. I disagree with the application of that principle in this case.
> Being liberal hides bugs, that's ok in case of hw or third party broken
> sw (it can't be changed and such workarounds should be clearly marked),
> but sw that is under our control should be fixed.
>
>
I think that makes sense as long as the actual problem is fixed.
I'd much rather have a workaround in the code than a nonfunctional thumb
drive.
Do we even know whether it's a QEMU bug or just funky hardware?

-- Jirka Z.
_______________________________________________
HelenOS-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.modry.cz/listinfo/helenos-devel

Reply via email to