Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 09/16] vl.c: Reword -no-kvm-pit-reinjection deprecation warning

[Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 06:10:17PM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  vl.c | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c
> > index af8d09c..67147e0 100644
> > --- a/vl.c
> > +++ b/vl.c
> > @@ -3667,8 +3667,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
> >                      { /* end of list */ }
> >                  };
> >  
> > -                error_report("warning: option deprecated, use "
> > -                             "lost_tick_policy property of kvm-pit instead");
> > +                error_report("warning: -no-kvm-pit-reinjection deprecated by "
> > +                             "-global kvm-pit.lost_tick_policy=discard");
> >                  qdev_prop_register_global_list(kvm_pit_lost_tick_policy);
> >                  break;
> >              }
> 
> Repeating the option in the error message rarely improves the message,
> because error_report() already shows it.  It's actually misleading when
> the option comes from a configuration file read with -readconfig.
> 
> Fortunately, -readconfig doesn't support the option, so that's not an
> issue here.
> 
> For the command line, the message changes from
> 
>     qemu-system-x86_64: -no-kvm-pit-reinjection: warning: option deprecated, use lost_tick_policy property of kvm-pit instead
> 
> to
> 
>     qemu-system-x86_64: -no-kvm-pit-reinjection: warning: -no-kvm-pit-reinjection deprecated by -global kvm-pit.lost_tick_policy=discard
> 
> Perhaps:
> 
>     qemu-system-x86_64: -no-kvm-pit-reinjection: warning: deprecated, replaced by -global kvm-pit.lost_tick_policy=discard
> 
> Similar argument for PATCH 08.
> 

Ah, I hadn't looked closely enough at error_report to know that the option
would be output already with my "ignoring" phrase suggestion. I definitely
agree that repeating it should be avoided.

"warning: deprecated, ignoring"

Thanks,
drew