From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E8BFCE7A81 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 06:56:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qkfV8-0008CU-8D; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 02:55:26 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qkfV7-0008C7-83 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 02:55:25 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qkfV5-0003xz-PJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 02:55:25 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1695624923; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=0lpXRHEuqkAujVgnyi+CfV+7VUrZLjfn/pf5h+43Aaw=; b=Ixm494/EUkLo7tLGcgRs+F5b918Nzjo0NFirzDvQTHvJYoUtckdojRfixxQkSKQaSRyIEh t0WfrU2vGyBBXBFO+7lXuFb2UqQfiUsByx9UPZt2cAAccozOUHVvbRFUmL/Cbb8/U8eBWt f7zdPEOIQeoxoWXtiGU33JkiG0wl92c= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-201-qu6XAqWdN66be1fcixjC_Q-1; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 02:55:21 -0400 X-MC-Unique: qu6XAqWdN66be1fcixjC_Q-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7224101A529; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 06:55:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (unknown [10.39.192.25]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C44A540C6EA8; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 06:55:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CA7E921E6900; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 08:55:19 +0200 (CEST) From: Markus Armbruster To: "Zhijian Li (Fujitsu)" Cc: "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , "quintela@redhat.com" , "peterx@redhat.com" , "leobras@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH 23/52] migration/rdma: Clean up qemu_rdma_wait_comp_channel()'s error value References: <20230918144206.560120-1-armbru@redhat.com> <20230918144206.560120-24-armbru@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2023 08:55:19 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Zhijian Li's message of "Mon, 25 Sep 2023 05:43:19 +0000") Message-ID: <87il7yeo88.fsf@pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.2 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org "Zhijian Li (Fujitsu)" writes: > On 18/09/2023 22:41, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> qemu_rdma_wait_comp_channel() returns 0 on success, and either -1 or >> rdma->error_state on failure. Callers actually expect a negative >> error value. > > I don't see the only one callers expect a negative error code. > migration/rdma.c:1654: ret = qemu_rdma_wait_comp_channel(rdma, ch); > migration/rdma.c-1655- if (ret) { > migration/rdma.c-1656- goto err_block_for_wrid; You're right. I want the change anyway, to let me simplify the code some. I'll adjust the commit message. > I believe rdma->error_state can't be positive, but let's >> make things more obvious by simply returning -1 on any failure. >> >> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster >> --- >> migration/rdma.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/migration/rdma.c b/migration/rdma.c >> index 3421ae0796..efbb3c7754 100644 >> --- a/migration/rdma.c >> +++ b/migration/rdma.c >> @@ -1588,7 +1588,7 @@ static int qemu_rdma_wait_comp_channel(RDMAContext *rdma, >> if (rdma->received_error) { >> return -EPIPE; >> } >> - return rdma->error_state; >> + return -!!rdma->error_state; > > And i rarely see such things, below would be more clear. > > return rdma->error_state ? -1 : 0: Goes away in PATCH 26: @@ -1588,7 +1588,7 @@ static int qemu_rdma_wait_comp_channel(RDMAContext *rdma, if (rdma->received_error) { return -1; } - return -!!rdma->error_state; + return -rdma->errored; } static struct ibv_comp_channel *to_channel(RDMAContext *rdma, uint64_t wrid) > >> } >> >> static struct ibv_comp_channel *to_channel(RDMAContext *rdma, uint64_t wrid)