On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 10:36:41AM +0100, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
> It is a bit more code churn if I also include inval.c, but I still do not
> think it would be too bad.
The blast looks acceptable with inval.c in sight. What's less
acceptable is the set of failures generated, like:
#3 0x00000000019e7ac4 in ExceptionalCondition
(conditionName=0x1e31ff0 "cacheId >= 0 && cacheId < SysCacheSize &&
SysCache[cacheId]", fileName=0x1e31e80 "syscache.c",
lineNumber=223) at assert.c:65
#4 0x00000000019d277e in SearchSysCache1 (cacheId=4294967295,
key1=16778) at syscache.c:223
I didn't look beyond that.
--
Michael