> ===================================================== > REVIEWER: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > WEBREV: http://cr.grommit.com/~zf162725/cr_0308/ > FILES: Misc > NOTES: Description of feedbacks: > ACCEPT Request accepted > REJECT Request rejected > EXPLAIN Explanation given > DISCUSS Request requires further discussion to resolve > DEFER Request deferred (e.g. because work is out-of-scope) > ===================================================== > > usr/src/cmd/cmd-inet/usr.lib/wpad/driver.h > usr/src/cmd/cmd-inet/usr.lib/wpad/eloop.h > usr/src/cmd/cmd-inet/usr.lib/wpad/wpa_enc.h > > No comments. > > usr/src/cmd/cmd-inet/usr.lib/wpad/driver_wifi.c > wpa_driver_wifi_get_bssid() line 64: > (void) pthread_mutex_lock(&gbuf_lk); > in case pthread_mutex_lock failed, it's better to use: > assert(pthread_mutex_lock(&gbuf_lk) == 0)); > Please correct other usage of pthread_mutex_lock() in the file > > | ACCEPT
I disagree with this code review comment. assert() must *never* surround code that is required for correctness, since it will be compiled out when built non-DEBUG. That is, if -DNDEBUG is defined, this assert() will go away along with the pthread_mutex_lock() inside it, and the lock will not be acquired. This change needs to be undone. (As an aside, it's perfectly normal to ignore the return value from pthread_mutex_lock(), since it can never fail in normal operation.) -- meem _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
