On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 6:07 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> writes: > > So that gives a very simple back-patchable patch. > > Hmm, so is the *rest* of that function perfectly okay with being > interrupted?
It looks OK to me. There aren't any CFI()s in there.
