From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57549) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1alXdU-0004lB-ED for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 04:07:25 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1alXdQ-0001jC-Cw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 04:07:24 -0400 Received: from [59.151.112.132] (port=23517 helo=heian.cn.fujitsu.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1alXdO-0001dq-Gz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 04:07:20 -0400 References: <1459161888-32566-1-git-send-email-caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <56FAEBE6.2000609@redhat.com> <56FB51AD.7000107@cn.fujitsu.com> <56FB95C3.9020508@redhat.com> From: Cao jin Message-ID: <56FCDB33.5010604@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 16:09:23 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56FB95C3.9020508@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] Add param Error ** for msi_init() List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Marcel Apfelbaum , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: mst@redhat.com, jasowang@redhat.com, Markus Armbruster , alex.williamson@redhat.com, hare@suse.de, dmitry@daynix.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, jsnow@redhat.com, kraxel@redhat.com On 03/30/2016 05:00 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: > On 03/30/2016 07:10 AM, Cao jin wrote: > > Hi, > >> >> Yes, I should add more hint message. I don`t quite understand about: >> >> /have a "warning only" error type so the reporting party can decide to >> issue a warning or to fail/ >> >> Do you mean still using VMW_WRPRN or using error_append_hint? It seems >> VMW_WRPRN should only work in debug time? and if user should see this >> error message, should use error_report_err ? > > No, it is not related to VMW_WRPRN. On this subject, those are debugging > warnings > and we should keep them the same as before. > ok > About the "warning only" error type: if an error is returned, the caller > assumes that the initialization failed and it will return with failure. > That means > that you cannot return a non-null error if you want the process to > finish OK. > > This is why you had to: > - report the error (even if this function should not be a reporter > because it receives an Error parameter) > - empty the error: so why use error at all, right? > > My point is if the caller had a way to check what kind of error this is > and act accordingly, it would be nicer. But again, this is out of the > scope of this patch, only some thoughts. > I see, and agree. >> >>> >> >> see what I was told before: >> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-trivial/2015-10/msg00116.html >> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-trivial/2015-10/msg00123.html >> >> Actually I am ok with both sides. I just stop sending coding style >> patch since then:) > > Oh, I hate when it happens to me, tho different opinions, how can you > deal with that, right ? :) > >> >> I don`t know, coding style & indentation patch really matters or is >> just a personal taste thing? > > Coding style and indentation *are important* IMHO. > Totally, absolutely agree > For this case, what I would do is put the new lines and comments in a > separate patch,\ > but send it with *the same* series, not through trivial list, saying > something like: > "fixed some code style problems while resolving the ... problem". > OK -- Yours Sincerely, Cao jin