[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v7 01/11] qapi/error: add (Error **errp) cleaning APIs
21.02.2020 19:34, Markus Armbruster wrote: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:21.02.2020 10:38, Markus Armbruster wrote:Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:Add functions to clean Error **errp: call corresponding Error *err cleaning function an set pointer to NULL. New functions: error_free_errp error_report_errp warn_report_errp Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Greg Kurz <groug@xxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@xxxxxxxxxx> --- CC: Eric Blake <eblake@xxxxxxxxxx> CC: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@xxxxxxxxxx> CC: Max Reitz <mreitz@xxxxxxxxxx> CC: Greg Kurz <groug@xxxxxxxx> CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx> CC: Anthony Perard <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx> CC: Paul Durrant <paul@xxxxxxx> CC: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@xxxxxxxxxx> CC: "Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@xxxxxxxxxx> CC: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@xxxxxxxxxx> CC: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@xxxxxxxxxx> CC: Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> CC: Markus Armbruster <armbru@xxxxxxxxxx> CC: Michael Roth <mdroth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> CC: qemu-block@xxxxxxxxxx CC: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx include/qapi/error.h | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+) diff --git a/include/qapi/error.h b/include/qapi/error.h index ad5b6e896d..d34987148d 100644 --- a/include/qapi/error.h +++ b/include/qapi/error.h @@ -309,6 +309,32 @@ void warn_reportf_err(Error *err, const char *fmt, ...) void error_reportf_err(Error *err, const char *fmt, ...) GCC_FMT_ATTR(2, 3); +/* + * Functions to clean Error **errp: call corresponding Error *err cleaning + * function, then set pointer to NULL. + */ +static inline void error_free_errp(Error **errp) +{ + assert(errp && *errp); + error_free(*errp); + *errp = NULL; +} + +static inline void error_report_errp(Error **errp) +{ + assert(errp && *errp); + error_report_err(*errp); + *errp = NULL; +} + +static inline void warn_report_errp(Error **errp) +{ + assert(errp && *errp); + warn_report_err(*errp); + *errp = NULL; +} + + /* * Just like error_setg(), except you get to specify the error class. * Note: use of error classes other than ERROR_CLASS_GENERIC_ERROR isThese appear to be unused apart from the Coccinelle script in PATCH 03. They are used in the full "[RFC v5 000/126] error: auto propagated local_err" series. Options: 1. Pick a few more patches into this part I series, so these guys come with users.It needs some additional effort for this series.. But it's possible. Still, I think that we at least should not pull out patches which should be in future series (for example from ppc or block/)..Yes, we want to keep related stuff together.Grepping through v5: for x in {warn_report_errp,error_report_errp,error_free_errp}; do echo == $x ==; git grep -l $x | grep -v coccinelle | grep -v 'error\.h'; echo; done == warn_report_errp == block/file-posix.c hw/ppc/spapr.c hw/ppc/spapr_caps.c hw/ppc/spapr_irq.c hw/vfio/pci.c net/tap.c qom/object.c == error_report_errp == hw/block/vhost-user-blk.c util/oslib-posix.c == error_free_errp == block.c block/qapi.c block/sheepdog.c block/snapshot.c blockdev.c chardev/char-socket.c hw/audio/intel-hda.c hw/core/qdev-properties.c hw/pci-bridge/pci_bridge_dev.c hw/pci-bridge/pcie_pci_bridge.c hw/scsi/megasas.c hw/scsi/mptsas.c hw/usb/hcd-xhci.c io/net-listener.c migration/colo.c qga/commands-posix.c qga/commands-win32.c util/qemu-sockets.c What do you want to add?PATCH v5 032 uses both error_report_errp() and error_free_errp(). Adding warn_report_errp() without a user is okay with me. What do you think? If there are patches you consider related to 032, feel free to throw them in. 032 is qga/commands-win32.c and util/oslib-posix.c Seems that they are wrongly grouped into one patch. qga/commands-win32.c matches qga/ (Michael Roth) and util/oslib-posix.c matches POSIX (Paolo Bonzini) So, it should be two separate patches anyway. For [1.] I only afraid that we'll have to wait for maintainers, who were not interested in previous iterations, to review these new patches.. 2. Punt this patch to the first part that has users, along with the part of the Coccinelle script that deals with them.But coccinelle script would be wrong, if we drop this part from it. I think, that after commit which adds coccinelle script, it should work with any file, not only subset of these series. So, it's probably OK for now to drop these functions, forcing their addition if coccinelle script will be applied where these functions are needed. We can, for example comment these three functions. Splitting coccinelle script into two parts, which will be in different series will not help any patch-porting processes. Moreover, this will create dependencies between future series updating other files. So, I don't like [2.]..And it's likely more work than 1.3. Do nothing: accept the functions without users.OK for me)I habitually dislike 3., but reviewing the rest of this series might make me override that dislike.[...] -- Best regards, Vladimir _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |