> -----Original Message----- > From: Dario Faggioli [mailto:dario.faggi...@citrix.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 4:14 PM > To: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > Cc: andrew.coop...@citrix.com; george.dun...@eu.citrix.com; Wu, Feng > <feng...@intel.com>; Tian, Kevin <kevin.t...@intel.com>; xen- > de...@lists.xen.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] Pause/Unpause the domain before/after assigning > PI hooks > > On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 01:31 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > On 20.09.16 at 01:12, <dario.faggi...@citrix.com> wrote: > > > How's possible for the solution here to be "either remove the > > > ASSERT() > > > _OR_ change the code"? That really makes few sense to me... :-O > > > > I disagree: Whether fixing/removing an ASSERT() that triggered or > > adjusting other code to make the ASSERT() not trigger can indeed > > both be an option, and may to some degree be a matter of taste. > > > Yes, of course this is a possibility... I thought it was clear that I > was simplifying things, but maybe I was simplifying too much, or "just" > expressed myself bad. > > What I wasn't clear about was whether it is _correctness_ that is at > risk or not. And that's right because I thought we established already > that this wasn't a correctness issue, while it looked to me, from > reading the discussion, that it actually may be. > > My bad again, for sure, sorry. Now I'll go back to the code to fix my > misconceptions and (hopefully) be able to make myself more useful. :-)
You are always useful, your advices are always valuable! :) Thanks, Feng > > Thanks and Regards, > Dario > -- > <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli > Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
