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 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 smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94309C6FD1F for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:35:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rmx22-0006p9-Sa; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 10:35:06 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rmx1y-0006go-MH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 10:35:02 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rmx1r-0001GK-Ux for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 10:35:01 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1710945293; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=1cN38NBjlMF0uWVQcOgyeHitgcC5dBjzc+vYk+jt6mE=; b=HanJaAdQXHTIoE/i9a6+MmQop2q1+85V5/s1A4SWT6rv7iEoFePM901iRRkyGedh1hbFLF 74y+BPYixeFDuEY3k62B6xA+z6VHNFE3EbeLE/w+bTY/oCJfBKh5Gf4MM0egJ8oJkqiWoX j41iRei5WGl8O8Ub5jxveYOB0qpF8TU= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-163-glULwTDbM026Ofcr-ajTlA-1; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 10:34:48 -0400 X-MC-Unique: glULwTDbM026Ofcr-ajTlA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.10]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A72C8007A4; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:34:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (unknown [10.39.192.138]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34054492BDA; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:34:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 30A9521E6A28; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 15:34:43 +0100 (CET) From: Markus Armbruster To: Peter Maydell Cc: Daniel P. =?utf-8?Q?Berrang=C3=A9?= , Tao Su , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, xiaoyao.li@intel.com, alex.bennee@linaro.org, armbru@redhat.com, philmd@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] target/i386: Revert monitor_puts() in do_inject_x86_mce() In-Reply-To: (Peter Maydell's message of "Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:04:42 +0000") References: <20240320083640.523287-1-tao1.su@linux.intel.com> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 15:34:43 +0100 Message-ID: <87y1adm0os.fsf@pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.10 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -24 X-Spam_score: -2.5 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.417, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Peter Maydell writes: > On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 at 13:03, Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 04:36:40PM +0800, Tao Su wrote: >> > monitor_puts() doesn't check the monitor pointer, but do_inject_x86_mc= e() >> > may have a parameter with NULL monitor pointer. Revert monitor_puts() = in >> > do_inject_x86_mce() to fix, then the fact that we send the same messag= e to >> > monitor and log is again more obvious. >> >> Yikes, why do we have such a horrible trap-door in our >> monitor output APIs. >> >> Isn't the right fix here to make 'monitor_puts' check for >> NULL & be a no-op, in the same way 'monitor_printf' does, >> so the APIs have consistent behaviour. > > The other difference between monitor_puts(mon, s) and > monitor_printf(mon, "%s", s) > is that the latter will return an error if the monitor is QMP, whereas > the former will go ahead and print the message anyway. That one is > awkward to resolve, because the mechanism the QMP monitor uses to > print the JSON in qmp_send_response() is to call monitor_puts()... We need a low-level function to send to a monitor, be it HMP or QMP: monitor_puts(). We need a high-level function to format JSON and send it to QMP: qmp_send_response(). We need a high-level functions to format text and send it to HMP: monitor_printf(), ... Trouble is the first and the last one are deceptively named. The names suggest monitor_printf() is to monitor_puts() what printf() is to puts(). Not true. Naming the functions that expect an HMP monitor hmp_FOO() would make more sense. Renaming them now would be quite some churn, though.