From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49063)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1UPVpX-00074C-A8
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 06:31:13 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1UPVpW-0000nz-67
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 06:31:11 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55835)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1UPVpV-0000no-Tx
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 06:31:10 -0400
Message-ID: <5163EDBD.7070907@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 12:30:21 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1365172636-28628-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com>
	<1365172636-28628-4-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com>
	<20130408183046.GB11124@otherpad.lan.raisama.net>
In-Reply-To: <20130408183046.GB11124@otherpad.lan.raisama.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 03/22] target-i386: split out CPU creation
 and features parsing into cpu_x86_create()
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: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Cc: aliguori@us.ibm.com, claudio.fontana@huawei.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, aderumier@odiso.com, lcapitulino@redhat.com, jfrei@linux.vnet.ibm.com, yang.z.zhang@intel.com, Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>, afaerber@suse.de, lig.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com, rth@twiddle.net

Il 08/04/2013 20:30, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
>> > -    cpu_x86_register(cpu, name, &error);
>> > -    if (error) {
>> > +    cpu_x86_register(cpu, name, errp);
>> > +    if (error_is_set(errp)) {
> So the function now does error checking properly if and only if errp is
> not NULL. Do we really want to do that?

No, using error_propagate is the correct idiom indeed.

Paolo

>> >          goto out;
>> >      }
>> >  
>> > -    cpu_x86_parse_featurestr(cpu, features, &error);
>> > -    if (error) {
>> > +    cpu_x86_parse_featurestr(cpu, features, errp);
>> > +    if (error_is_set(errp)) {
>> >          goto out;
>> >      }
>> >  
>> > -    object_property_set_bool(OBJECT(cpu), true, "realized", &error);
>> > +out:
>> > +    g_strfreev(model_pieces);
> Any specific reason you didn't choose to keep 'Error *error = NULL'
> inside cpu_x86_create() as well, and use error_propagate() here? I
> believe it would make the patch simpler and easier to review, and at the
> same time make cpu_x86_init() check for errors properly even if errp is
> NULL. This is the opposite of what you did on x86_cpu_realizefn() at
> patch 01/22.