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 CDA84CD37B0 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 17:15:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qiHqI-0000MI-9R; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 13:15:26 -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 1qiHq4-0000IX-VR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 13:15:13 -0400 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de ([195.135.220.28]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qiHq3-0001t7-Gw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 13:15:12 -0400 Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6C2B21F10; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 17:15:09 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1695057309; h=from:from:reply-to: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=35oAZfZI+V+NltzSK1jJgah0KYKxGizjhOMcXFcW4V0=; b=gfL9xkMffxqNvFV8xt/Mq8deGlPSvGSSrDbNrFhkbOwK48JhlMzFDNktDwL/DLp4IgHR3c KKG8oQpdZ2EMcAI6g2ameyCTA7Yt9ZdNTT9nDdivaaV7r87QtGS0k6l+84AjdAvRoWOq2n NmERZHbOFNug2G4KyD+sPexVkLPTPmw= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1695057309; h=from:from:reply-to: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=35oAZfZI+V+NltzSK1jJgah0KYKxGizjhOMcXFcW4V0=; b=T/pyl/IUxRZhDmwiGTL9iqZIgqK96Au9xD0XejAykbuWKRxH95y0JTOIDr9hLpCtkdw04h wiyfAseeSz1XCiDg== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 301F71358A; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 17:15:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id YZUDO5yFCGVtEgAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Mon, 18 Sep 2023 17:15:08 +0000 From: Fabiano Rosas To: Markus Armbruster , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: quintela@redhat.com, peterx@redhat.com, leobras@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/52] migration/rdma: Fix qemu_rdma_accept() to return failure on errors In-Reply-To: <20230918144206.560120-9-armbru@redhat.com> References: <20230918144206.560120-1-armbru@redhat.com> <20230918144206.560120-9-armbru@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 14:15:06 -0300 Message-ID: <87led3z9lx.fsf@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=195.135.220.28; envelope-from=farosas@suse.de; helo=smtp-out1.suse.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 Markus Armbruster writes: > qemu_rdma_accept() returns 0 in some cases even when it didn't > complete its job due to errors. Impact is not obvious. I figure the > caller will soon fail again with a misleading error message. > > Fix it to return -1 on any failure. > > Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster Reviewed-by: Fabiano Rosas