From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Mr016-0004EZ-6Q
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 21:54:36 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Mr011-0004CM-10
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 21:54:35 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39184 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Mr010-0004CH-Rj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 21:54:30 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:16554)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1Mr010-0000f2-AG
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 21:54:30 -0400
Received: from int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
	(int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.18])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n8P1sTrS011962
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 21:54:29 -0400
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Fix exit on 'pci_add' Monitor command
References: <20090924111601.1d3668d2@doriath>
	<87iqf8ciup.fsf@pike.pond.sub.org> <20090924163123.5eec5c90@doriath>
From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 03:50:03 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20090924163123.5eec5c90@doriath> (Luiz Capitulino's message of
	"Thu\, 24 Sep 2009 16\:31\:23 -0300")
Message-ID: <87iqf76bec.fsf@pike.pond.sub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
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: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com> writes:

> On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:12:30 +0200
> Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:
[...]
>> My major complaint is that I'd rather see the code cleaned up there.
>> It's perfectly fine for code that can run only during startup to
>> terminate the program on configuration error.  Code to be used after
>> startup (used from monitor, in particular) must not do that.  Instead,
>> it should return failure up the call chain, until we reach either
>> startup code or monitor code, where the policy how to handle the error
>> resides.
>
>  What cleanup do you suggest?
>
>  Note that it's not only about exit(), the function also has some
> fprintf()s. If a big refactor is needed to properly fix this,
> I guess we will have to live with the bug for a long time...

See the patch series I'm going to post.