[master] c3bd169 Silence a Coverity non-defect
dridi at varni.sh
Thu May 24 08:48:26 UTC 2018
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 10:29 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk at phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> In message <CABoVN9DFr5PwG+8BjmcB7oSgoXmudJ_4htoWyODJfOtJOYxZMg at mail.gmail.com>, Dridi Boukelmoune writes:
>>> --- a/bin/varnishd/cache/cache_panic.c
>>> +++ b/bin/varnishd/cache/cache_panic.c
>>> @@ -401,6 +401,7 @@ pan_busyobj(struct vsb *vsb, const struct busyobj *bo)
>>> VSB_indent(vsb, 2);
>>> PAN_CheckMagic(vsb, bo, BUSYOBJ_MAGIC);
>>> pan_ws(vsb, bo->ws);
>>> + AN(bo->vfc);
>>Is it safe to put an assert here? Shouldn't we guard accesses to
>>bo->vfc if Nils thought it could be NULL?
> Actually, it's more that we don't want the panic code to panic
> because something is wrong: We want it to report with
> precision that something is wrong.
That's exactly why I'm asking!
More information about the varnish-commit