From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44859)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <famz@redhat.com>) id 1WFamE-0000ZE-AW
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:51:24 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <famz@redhat.com>) id 1WFam8-0007TN-B0
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:51:18 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:5080)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <famz@redhat.com>) id 1WFam8-0007TE-2k
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:51:12 -0500
Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
	(int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s1I2pBGR018831
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:51:11 -0500
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 10:51:19 +0800
From: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20140218025119.GA1228@T430.redhat.com>
References: <1392138233-26407-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<1392138233-26407-10-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<20140214164540.GK32343@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com>
	<20140214165954.GD17514@localhost.localdomain>
	<87d2io7l0e.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<20140217131545.GA1428@T430.redhat.com>
	<53020C8A.6090806@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <53020C8A.6090806@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 09/20] cow: correctly propagate errors
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: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, Jeff Cody <jcody@redhat.com>, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Mon, 02/17 14:20, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 17/02/2014 14:15, Fam Zheng ha scritto:
> >Does this mean that error_is_set() is always used by programmer to check a
> >non-NULL error pointer? Is there any case to call error_is_set(errp) without
> >knowing if errp is NULL or not? If no, should we enforce the rule and add
> >assert(errp) in error_is_set()?
> 
> I think we shouldn't need error_is_set() at all...
> 

Thinking about both use cases (errp is NULL or not) and I agree to this.

Fam