From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Lglly-00064n-GC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:08:26 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Lgllw-00062T-UL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:08:25 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=36106 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Lgllw-00061W-8e
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:08:24 -0400
Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:2627)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <revol@free.fr>) id 1Lgllv-0006z4-Vl
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:08:24 -0400
Received: from smtp4-g21.free.fr ([212.27.42.4])
	by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <revol@free.fr>) id 1LghZP-0001CG-Lj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Mar 2009 11:39:12 -0400
In-Reply-To: <49B528B3.9020800@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [HaikuPorts-devs] [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Haiku host
	support and general configure issues
From: "=?utf-8?q?Fran=C3=A7ois?= Revol" <revol@free.fr>
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:39:42 +0100 CET
Message-Id: <8294048029-BeMail@laptop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: haikuports-devs@ports.haiku-files.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

> Fran=C3=A7ois Revol wrote:
> >> We could define a qemu=5Ferrno() which returns errno converted to 
> >> positive 
> >> numbers.  While it will touch a lot of places, I don't think it 
> > > can 
> >> be 
> >> considered invasive.
> >>     
> >
> > I'm used to using the opposite, RETERR() returning always negative 
> > codes from either errno or E*, and it works quite well.
> >
> > I don't see the point in making stuff positive to return them 
> > negated.
> >   
> 
> Changing errno to qemu=5Ferrno() is not an invasive change (at least, 
> not 
> much).  Adding a RETERR() is, with significant chance for 
> regressions.

Except it's not enough.
It's =5Fnot=5F only errno that is < 0, but the E* codes too.
so all return -EFOO are indeed broken.

Another option is tu #define other codes from E* like QEINVAL, ...
OSSv4 does this.

Anyway, I'm too busy to look into it yet, will see later.

Fran=C3=A7ois.