[DTrace-devel] [PATCH 3/4] uregs: Fix access to thread members on x86

[Eugene Loh]

Yeah, I guess.  It doesn't make too much sense to add a lot of 
protection in case pt_regs[] changes size, but an assert() can give us 
reassurance that, if something unexpected were to change, we'd find out 
about it in some easy-to-recognize way.

I just posted v2.  Same patch, but with an assertion.

On 5/19/23 13:11, Nick Alcock wrote:
> Maybe an assert() here might be a good idea? I'd rather have an
> assertion failure than a buffer underrun.