On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 04:24:49PM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote: > Separetaly from debug code being careful, if it's a rule that bdv can't > be NULL, it's just as well to put in a KASSERT. Then we'll find out > where that isn't true and can fix it.
I must not be getting something. If rf_containsboot() is passed a NULL pointer, it will trap with a page fault and we can get a stacktrace from ddb. If we add a KASSERT it will panic and we can get a stacktrace from ddb. I don't see where the benefit in that is. Do you think we should add a KASSERT to document that rf_containsboot() does expect a valid pointer? I'd see value in that and would go ahead with it. --chris