From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39302) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d1MIY-0003cB-De for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 20:19:43 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d1MIX-0003jZ-EU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 20:19:42 -0400 Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 08:19:32 +0800 From: Fam Zheng Message-ID: <20170421001932.GO24486@lemon.lan> References: <20170420040003.31074-1-famz@redhat.com> <20170420153016.GI3227@redhat.com> <20170420203250.GI4747@noname.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170420203250.GI4747@noname.redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] sheepdog: Set error when connection fails List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: "Daniel P. Berrange" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, sheepdog@lists.wpkg.org, qemu-block@nongnu.org, Hitoshi Mitake , Jeff Cody , Max Reitz , Liu Yuan On Thu, 04/20 22:32, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 20.04.2017 um 17:30 hat Daniel P. Berrange geschrieben: > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 12:00:03PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng > > > --- > > > block/sheepdog.c | 1 + > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/block/sheepdog.c b/block/sheepdog.c > > > index fb9203e..7e889ee 100644 > > > --- a/block/sheepdog.c > > > +++ b/block/sheepdog.c > > > @@ -608,6 +608,7 @@ static int connect_to_sdog(BDRVSheepdogState *s, Error **errp) > > > qemu_set_nonblock(fd); > > > } else { > > > fd = -EIO; > > > + error_setg(errp, "Failed to connect to sheepdog server"); > > > } > > > > This doesn't make much sense to me. The lines just above the > > diff context have this: > > > > fd = socket_connect(s->addr, errp, NULL, NULL); Oops! :( > > > > socket_connect should have already reported an error on "errp" > > in the scenario that 'fd == -1'. > > By the way, am I the only one who thinks that having errp anywhere else > than as the last argument is bad style? I can easily see myself missing > that this functions sets it because the last argument is NULL. Hmm, exactly.. Socket code does this here and there, and it's hard to read. Fam