From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53468)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peterx@redhat.com>) id 1bZxDV-00022U-Nv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 05:32:58 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peterx@redhat.com>) id 1bZxDR-0001cQ-Um
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 05:32:56 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:51826)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peterx@redhat.com>) id 1bZxDR-0001bm-PQ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 05:32:53 -0400
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 17:32:49 +0800
From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20160817093249.GK14217@pxdev.xzpeter.org>
References: <1470901038-9409-1-git-send-email-peterx@redhat.com>
	<1470901038-9409-2-git-send-email-peterx@redhat.com>
	<87eg5p6kk0.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org>
	<20160816115351.GB27853@al.usersys.redhat.com>
	<20160816121708.GD9866@pxdev.xzpeter.org>
	<20160817081706.GH14217@pxdev.xzpeter.org>
	<874m6jpwys.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <874m6jpwys.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] error-report: provide
 error_report_exit()
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel@redhat.com>, peter.maydell@linaro.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, fam@pxdev.xzpeter.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 11:26:51AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 08:17:08PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> >> > > 
> >> > > Also, please make it a function, not a macro:
> >> > > 
> >> > >     void error_report_fatal(const char *fmt, ...)
> >> > >     {
> >> > >         va_list ap;
> >> > > 
> >> > >         va_start(ap, fmt);
> >> > >         error_vreport(fmt, ap);
> >> > >         va_end(ap);
> >> > >         exit(1);
> >> > >     }
> >
> > Marcel (and reviewers),
> >
> > Now if we are having both error_report_fatal() and
> > error_report_abort(), we'll write error_report() three times if we all
> > take them as functions.
> 
> Yes, but all we duplicate is the usual var-arg boilerplate.
> 
> > How about we still use macro this time but leverage error_setg()
> > macro as mentioned by Fam, like:
> >
> > +#define error_report_fatal(...) error_setg(&error_fatal, __VA_ARGS__)
> > +#define error_report_abort(...) error_setg(&error_abort, __VA_ARGS__)
> >
> > In this case, we avoided calling exit() directly in the macro, and is
> > much cleaner than writting error_report() content for three times.
> 
> I'm afraid that destroys the layering.
> 
> Currently, Error objects (util/error.c) use error reporting
> (util/qemu-error.c), but not vice versa.  Their headers
> (include/qapi/error.h and include/qemu/error-report.h) are idependent.
> I like it that way.

I see. Then let me keep them functions.

Thanks,

-- peterx