From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51706) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dIGNM-0004Q4-87 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:26:33 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dIGNH-0008Gf-N1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:26:32 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42674) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dIGNH-0008GQ-Hv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:26:27 -0400 Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 18:26:21 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20170606182354-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/6] pci: Clean up error checking in pci_add_capability() List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Mao Zhongyi Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, marcel@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 03:54:37PM +0800, Mao Zhongyi wrote: > On success, pci_add_capability2() returns a positive value. On > failure, it sets an error and return a negative value. > > pci_add_capability() laboriously checks this behavior. No other > caller does. Drop the checks from pci_add_capability(). > > Cc: mst@redhat.com > Cc: marcel@redhat.com > Cc: armbru@redhat.com > Signed-off-by: Mao Zhongyi > Reviewed-by: Marcel Apfelbaum > --- > hw/pci/pci.c | 6 +----- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/pci/pci.c b/hw/pci/pci.c > index 98ccc27..53566b8 100644 > --- a/hw/pci/pci.c > +++ b/hw/pci/pci.c > @@ -2270,12 +2270,8 @@ int pci_add_capability(PCIDevice *pdev, uint8_t cap_id, > Error *local_err = NULL; > > ret = pci_add_capability2(pdev, cap_id, offset, size, &local_err); > - if (local_err) { > - assert(ret < 0); > + if (ret < 0) { > error_report_err(local_err); > - } else { > - /* success implies a positive offset in config space */ > - assert(ret > 0); > } > return ret; > } I don't see why this is a good idea. You drop a bunch of asserts, so naturally code is slightly tighter. We could gain the same by building with NDEBUG but we don't, we rather have more safety. > -- > 2.9.3 > > >