Re: [PATCH 2/3] Fix build with -DNDEBUG

On 15.05.2026 14:13, David Gibson wrote:

Since bc872d91765d, our assert() statements are omitted if we compile with -DNDEBUG, like the standard library assert(3). Unfortunately a trivial but embarrassing mistake in that patch means that instead of never aborting in this case, assert_with_msg() *always* aborts, breaking pretty much everything.

There's also a missing #include that breaks the build with -DNDEBUG on at least some library versions.

Reported-by: Jan Palus Fixes: bc872d91765d ("treewide: Spell ASSERT() as assert()") Signed-off-by: David Gibson --- util.h | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/util.h b/util.h index 70aadeba..11f71d45 100644 --- a/util.h +++ b/util.h @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ #ifndef UTIL_H #define UTIL_H

+#include #include #include #include @@ -60,7 +61,7 @@ void abort_with_msg(const char *fmt, ...) __func__, __FILE__, __LINE__, STRINGIFY(expr)) #else #define assert_with_msg(expr, ...) \ - ((void)(expr), 0 ? (void)0 : abort_with_msg(__VA_ARGS__)) + ((void)(expr), 1 ? (void)0 : abort_with_msg(__VA_ARGS__))

There is a slight semantic difference between assert() and assert_with_msg() when building with -DNDEBUG -- `expr` is still being evaluated in abort_with_msg() although likely optimized out in most builds. I'm assuming you'd prefer to avoid cppcheck suppressions. How about moving `expr` into branch which is never evaluated then? Would it keep cppcheck happy? + (1 ? (void)0 : ((void)(expr), abort_with_msg(__VA_ARGS__)))

#endif

#ifdef P_tmpdir -- 2.54.0