From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7AD7C31E4B for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 18:58:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9068B21473 for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 18:58:48 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9068B21473 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:54368 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hbrPT-0006y1-Sm for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 14:58:47 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35583) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hbq5c-0001rH-W4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 13:34:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hbq5a-0000Yn-JI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 13:34:12 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52574) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hbq5a-0000Mx-E9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 13:34:10 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DAAF308FBA0 for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 17:33:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-116-92.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.92]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C365460CA3; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 17:33:36 +0000 (UTC) From: Juan Quintela To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" In-Reply-To: <20190614112636.GC2785@work-vm> (David Alan Gilbert's message of "Fri, 14 Jun 2019 12:26:36 +0100") References: <20190612105323.7051-1-quintela@redhat.com> <20190612105323.7051-6-quintela@redhat.com> <20190614112636.GC2785@work-vm> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 19:33:34 +0200 Message-ID: <87k1dof4wh.fsf@trasno.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.43]); Fri, 14 Jun 2019 17:33:37 +0000 (UTC) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 5/6] migration: Make no compression operations into its own structure X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: quintela@redhat.com Cc: Laurent Vivier , Thomas Huth , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster , Paolo Bonzini Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" wrote: > * Juan Quintela (quintela@redhat.com) wrote: >> It will be used later. >> >> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela >> + */ >> +static int nocomp_recv_pages(MultiFDRecvParams *p, uint32_t used, Error **errp) >> +{ >> + if (p->flags != 0) { >> + error_setg(errp, "multifd %d: flags received %x flags expected %x", >> + p->id, MULTIFD_FLAG_ZLIB, p->flags); > > Can you just explain that a bit - the 'received' seems to be constant > while the expected is p->flags - is that the right way around? > Why would you expect FLAG_ZLIB in nocomp? When I changed printf's to error_setg I did a bit *too much* of copy paste. Then I decided to put consistently received/expected in all messages and clearly I failed. Fixing, Thanks.