From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gnu.wildebeest.org (gnu.wildebeest.org [45.83.234.184]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23759385742E for ; Fri, 27 May 2022 15:10:53 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 23759385742E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=klomp.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=klomp.org Received: from tarox.wildebeest.org (83-87-18-245.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.87.18.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gnu.wildebeest.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1118B302FB8A; Fri, 27 May 2022 17:10:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: by tarox.wildebeest.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AF5EC4000C75; Fri, 27 May 2022 17:10:50 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <75d92c2da76663d691d3d8c7c9a1c015f9ee43ec.camel@klomp.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] libdwfl: Update docs and nonnull attributes for dwfl_module_addrinfo From: Mark Wielaard To: elfutils-devel@sourceware.org Cc: William Cohen Date: Fri, 27 May 2022 17:10:50 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20220515200030.343101-1-mark@klomp.org> References: <20220515200030.343101-1-mark@klomp.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-10.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: elfutils-devel@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Elfutils-devel mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 May 2022 15:10:54 -0000 Hi, On Sun, 2022-05-15 at 22:00 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > Make clear that both the offset and sym arguments cannot be NULL. >=20 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3D1986555 I didn't get feedback on the actual wording, but I think this is better than we had. So pushed. Cheers, Mark