From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52242) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T24hN-0005JU-VM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:21:38 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T24hN-0005Xo-27 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:21:37 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42897) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T24hM-0005Xi-QT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:21:36 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:58:42 -0300 From: Luiz Capitulino Message-ID: <20120816145842.0751cf0a@doriath.home> In-Reply-To: <20120816134915.0c55ee8c@doriath.home> References: <1345117273-19526-1-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com> <1345117273-19526-2-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com> <20120816103057.675f433b@doriath.home> <87txw3djyc.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <20120816110359.7a88e552@doriath.home> <874no2c3gz.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <20120816114927.6f2951de@doriath.home> <87r4r67twa.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <20120816134915.0c55ee8c@doriath.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] pc_sysfw: Check for qemu_find_file() failure List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Markus Armbruster Cc: jordan.l.justen@intel.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, anthony@codemonkey.ws On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 13:49:15 -0300 Luiz Capitulino wrote: > > I converted more error messages to the error-reporting-infrastructure- > > du-jour than was enjoyable, and I can tell you that the restrictions > > that come with error_report() compared to anything-goes-fprintf() do > > make the job easier. > > This patch is fixing a function that's only used in command-line context, > I don't see why fprintf() shouldn't be a good fit. Your call about PROGNAME > is a valid one, but no function in the call chain prints it yet, so it's not > a big deal, specially if compared to the alternative (which is using > error_report()). I've talked with Markus about this on IRC and (correct me if I'm wrong Markus), he says that we could kill the HMP stuff from error_report() once no caller is depending on it. Looks like a plan. I'd rather not add new error_report() calls where it's not strictly needed, but no biggie.