From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LkNIn-0002J5-Pq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:49:13 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LkNIi-0002B0-LL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:49:12 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=43581 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LkNIi-0002Ak-CL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:49:08 -0400
Received: from mail2.shareable.org ([80.68.89.115]:41380)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <jamie@shareable.org>) id 1LkNIh-0006ay-Vt
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:49:08 -0400
Received: from jamie by mail2.shareable.org with local (Exim 4.63)
	(envelope-from <jamie@shareable.org>) id 1LkNId-00022c-Pn
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:49:03 +0000
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:49:03 +0000
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch 1/7] qemu: mutex/thread/cond wrappers
Message-ID: <20090319184903.GA7631@shareable.org>
References: <20090319145705.988576615@localhost.localdomain>
	<20090319150537.801001000@localhost.localdomain>
	<49C26BE9.4030905@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <49C26BE9.4030905@redhat.com>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Avi Kivity wrote:
> >+int qemu_mutex_init(QemuMutex *mutex)
> >+{
> >+    return pthread_mutex_init(&mutex->lock, NULL);
> >+}
> 
> No one will check the return code, so better to check it here and 
> abort() if it's bad.

I agree.

Same applies to pthread_mutex_lock, etc., all of which return an error
code, can fail if misused, and nobody checks.

-- Jamie