Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] error: passing a negative value to an os_errno is wrong

[SeokYeon Hwang <syeon.hwang@samsung.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Markus Armbruster [mailto:armbru@redhat.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 10, 2014 6:33 PM
> To: SeokYeon Hwang
> Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org; kongjianjun@gmail.com; paolo.bonzini@gmail.com;
> mreitz@redhat.com
> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] error: passing a negative value to an
> os_errno is wrong
> 
> SeokYeon Hwang <syeon.hwang@samsung.com> writes:
> 
> > Added 'assert(os_errno > 0)' in 'error_set_errno()'.
> > Fixed errno since it passes wrong value to 'error_set_errno()'.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: SeokYeon Hwang <syeon.hwang@samsung.com>
> > ---
> >  hw/pci/pcie.c | 2 +-
> >  util/error.c  | 1 +
> >  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/pci/pcie.c b/hw/pci/pcie.c index 58455bd..2902f7d
> > 100644
> > --- a/hw/pci/pcie.c
> > +++ b/hw/pci/pcie.c
> > @@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ static void pcie_cap_slot_hotplug_common(PCIDevice
> *hotplug_dev,
> >          /* the slot is electromechanically locked.
> >           * This error is propagated up to qdev and then to HMP/QMP.
> >           */
> > -        error_setg_errno(errp, -EBUSY, "slot is electromechanically
> locked");
> > +        error_setg_errno(errp, EBUSY, "slot is electromechanically
> > + locked");
> >      }
> >  }
> >
> > diff --git a/util/error.c b/util/error.c index 2ace0d8..6c9d995 100644
> > --- a/util/error.c
> > +++ b/util/error.c
> > @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ void error_set_errno(Error **errp, int os_errno,
> ErrorClass err_class,
> >          return;
> >      }
> >      assert(*errp == NULL);
> > +    assert(os_errno >= 0);
> >
> >      err = g_malloc0(sizeof(*err));
> 
> The first hunk could still go into 2.2 as a bug fix.  The rest can't.
> You could post just the first hunk as "[PATCH for-2.2] pci: Don't pass
> negative errno to error_set_errno()", with my R-by.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>

Did you mean separate this patch into two patches ??
One is "PATCH v4" and the other is "PATCH for-2.2". Am I right??

And I have a question. (I don't know review / merge process well.)
What happens to the "reviewed" but "not bug-fix" patch during "feature
freeze" time ??

Thanks.