On 12/3/18 4:43 AM, Alex Bennée wrote: >> case R_AARCH64_CONDBR19: >> - reloc_pc19(code_ptr, (tcg_insn_unit *)value); >> - break; >> + return reloc_pc19(code_ptr, (tcg_insn_unit *)value); >> default: >> tcg_abort(); >> } >> - return true; > > nit: the default leg could return false for the same effect
Would it be clearer changed to g_assert_not_reached()? Because I'm not intending "unknown relocation" to have the same effect as "out of range relocation". r~
