From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50388) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TdgX3-0003DB-1F for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 07:14:30 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TdgWt-0005dK-GG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 07:14:24 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:32393) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TdgWt-0005dC-8H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 07:14:15 -0500 Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 10:14:13 -0200 From: Luiz Capitulino Message-ID: <20121128101413.3530cf08@doriath.home> In-Reply-To: <50B5FD52.40209@redhat.com> References: <1354092873-11954-1-git-send-email-alevy@redhat.com> <20121128095456.1d032f4b@doriath.home> <50B5FD52.40209@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw/qdev-monitor: report error for -device List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Alon Levy , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, afaerber@suse.de, armbru@redhat.com On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:02:26 +0100 Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 28/11/2012 12:54, Luiz Capitulino ha scritto: > > On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 10:54:33 +0200 > > Alon Levy wrote: > > > >> Instead of aborting immediately after at DEVICE_CLASS(obj) > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Alon Levy > >> --- > >> hw/qdev-monitor.c | 5 +++++ > >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/hw/qdev-monitor.c b/hw/qdev-monitor.c > >> index 479eecd..3b70cdb 100644 > >> --- a/hw/qdev-monitor.c > >> +++ b/hw/qdev-monitor.c > >> @@ -426,6 +426,11 @@ DeviceState *qdev_device_add(QemuOpts *opts) > >> return NULL; > >> } > >> > >> + if (!object_class_dynamic_cast(obj, "device")) { > >> + qerror_report(QERR_INVALID_PARAMETER_TYPE, "driver", "device type"); > >> + return NULL; > >> + } > > > > Gives me the impression that something is wrong before this, but it's > > better to ask a QOM guy (CC'ing them). > > I would reuse the same error message as for "if (!obj)", and also use > TYPE_DEVICE instead of the hardcoded string, but the patch is ok. It's a bit weird to me that you check for a condition and right next you also assert it (it's what DEVICE_CLASS() will do). But I'm not familiar with QOM, so I'll just trust you. If the patch is good, why should we wait post-1.3 giving that it fixes a real bug?