From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-1.sys.kth.se (smtp-1.sys.kth.se [130.237.32.175]) by krisdoz.my.domain (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id pBKGt3Nm007139 for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2011 11:55:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailscan-1.sys.kth.se (mailscan-1.sys.kth.se [130.237.32.91]) by smtp-1.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40B8E156B5E for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2011 17:54:57 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at kth.se Received: from smtp-1.sys.kth.se ([130.237.32.175]) by mailscan-1.sys.kth.se (mailscan-1.sys.kth.se [130.237.32.91]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 8JwYsELzROsp for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2011 17:54:56 +0100 (CET) X-KTH-Auth: kristaps [193.10.49.5] X-KTH-mail-from: kristaps@bsd.lv X-KTH-rcpt-to: tech@mdocml.bsd.lv Received: from ctime.hhs.se (ctime.hhs.se [193.10.49.5]) by smtp-1.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6576E156AC5 for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2011 17:54:55 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4EF0BDDF.2090003@bsd.lv> Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 17:54:55 +0100 From: Kristaps Dzonsons User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; OpenBSD amd64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110805 Thunderbird/5.0 X-Mailinglist: mdocml-tech Reply-To: tech@mdocml.bsd.lv MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tech@mdocml.bsd.lv Subject: Re: Do not cast void pointers to pointers requiring alignment. References: <20111220011731.GB22316@iris.usta.de> <4EF06A3F.3010801@bsd.lv> <20111220164739.GA10043@iris.usta.de> In-Reply-To: <20111220164739.GA10043@iris.usta.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12/20/11 17:47, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > Hi Kristaps, > > Kristaps Dzonsons wrote on Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:58:07AM +0100: > >> Is it easier to apply this or wait for the patch being reviewed by >> millert@? Whichever's more convenient for you. > > I guess i'll apply it unless millert@ provides feedback before > we agree on it. > >> However, I don't like the assertions in this code. A bad database >> shouldn't result in assertions (except the internal hashtable, as >> it's a programmatic matter). > > I fully agree with that, but there are no assertions of the kind you > seem to suspect. > >> All of these areas (index_prune(), index_read(), etc.), are built >> with failure handlers when break;ing or return badly. Can you >> modify the patch to use these instead? > > That's already the case. Gah, you're absolutely right -- I didn't look closely enough. Thanks again! -- To unsubscribe send an email to tech+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv