Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53668) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gAskq-00019j-RE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2018 04:25:05 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gAskl-0004IV-7c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2018 04:25:03 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58372) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gAskk-0004Hs-RO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2018 04:24:59 -0400 From: Markus Armbruster References: <20181010120841.13214-1-fli@suse.com> <20181010120841.13214-4-fli@suse.com> <878t344o4l.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 10:24:49 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Fei Li's message of "Fri, 12 Oct 2018 13:55:08 +0800") Message-ID: <87r2gvshbi.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC v5 3/7] qemu_init_vcpu: add a new Error parameter to propagate List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Fei Li Cc: peterx@redhat.com, famz@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, dgilbert@redhat.com, quintela@redhat.com Fei Li writes: > On 10/11/2018 09:19 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Fei Li writes: >> >>> The caller of qemu_init_vcpu() already passed the **errp to handle >> Which caller? There are many. Or do you mean "The callers"? > Oh, sorry, I mean "The callers" :) >> >>> errors. In view of this, add a new Error parameter to the following >>> call trace to propagate the error and let the further caller check it. >> Which "call trace"? > Actually, I want to say all functions called by qemu_init_vcpu().. >> >>> Besides, make qemu_init_vcpu() return a Boolean value to let its >>> callers know whether it succeeds. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Fei Li >>> Reviewed-by: Fam Zheng >>> --- >>> accel/tcg/user-exec-stub.c | 2 +- >>> cpus.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++------------- >>> include/qom/cpu.h | 2 +- >>> target/alpha/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/arm/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/cris/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/hppa/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/i386/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/lm32/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/m68k/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/microblaze/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/mips/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/moxie/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/nios2/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/openrisc/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/ppc/translate_init.inc.c | 4 +++- >>> target/riscv/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/s390x/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/sh4/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/sparc/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/tilegx/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/tricore/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/unicore32/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> target/xtensa/cpu.c | 4 +++- >>> 24 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/accel/tcg/user-exec-stub.c b/accel/tcg/user-exec-stub.c >>> index a32b4496af..38f6b928d4 100644 >>> --- a/accel/tcg/user-exec-stub.c >>> +++ b/accel/tcg/user-exec-stub.c >>> @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ void cpu_resume(CPUState *cpu) >>> { >>> } >>> -void qemu_init_vcpu(CPUState *cpu) >>> +bool qemu_init_vcpu(CPUState *cpu, Error **errp) >>> { >> You need to return a value here. Sure you compile-tested this? > Oops! I forget the TCG case.. The `return true` should be added. > Thanks for pointing this out! You're welcome. >>> } >>> diff --git a/cpus.c b/cpus.c [...] >> I see how you changed the code to pass an Error from the >> qemu_FOO_start_vcpu() through qemu_init_vcpu() to its callers. I can't >> see how such errors can be created. Without a way to create any, the >> patch is pointless. What am I missing? > This patch is also the pre-patch for the updated qemu_thread_create() > in patch 7/7 > just as I explained in patch 2/7 [Issue1]. Patches that make little sense on their own, but pave the way for a later patch are okay. But they should explain that purpose in their commit message.