On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 9:54 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 09:50:36AM +0900, Richard Guo wrote:
> > Nice catch. The fix looks good to me. It seems to me that it's fine
> > to go without a test case, since the fix is quite straightforward.
>
> One could argue about using an injection point to force trick the
> iteration loop to be cheaper, but I could not really get excited about
> the coverage vs the cycles spent for it..
Exactly.
Thanks
Richard