From: "Marc-André Lureau" <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Use of g_return_if_fail(), g_return_val_if_fail()
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 19:34:55 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMxuvaxYacr6mcQZjqnG4GtmpGPbLbw-UMkumJyQZZCtDJhh2Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87r1os6mn5.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org>
Hi
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 7:14 PM Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> g_return_if_fail(), g_return_val_if_fail() are for programming errors:
>
> If expr evaluates to FALSE, the current function should be
> considered to have undefined behaviour (a programmer error). The
> only correct solution to such an error is to change the module that
> is calling the current function, so that it avoids this incorrect
> call.
>
> Unlike assert(), they continue regardless, undefined behavior be damned:
>
> To make this undefined behaviour visible, if expr evaluates to
> FALSE, the result is usually that a critical message is logged and
> the current function returns.
>
> Except when you ask for abort():
>
> To debug failure of a g_return_if_fail() check, run the code under a
> debugger with G_DEBUG=fatal-criticals or G_DEBUG=fatal-warnings
> defined in the environment.
>
> Like assert(), they can be compiled out:
>
> If G_DISABLE_CHECKS is defined then the check is not performed. You
> should therefore not depend on any side effects of expr .
>
> There are just three uses outside contrib/:
>
> * backends/dbus-vmstate.c:232: g_return_val_if_fail(bytes_read == len, -1);
>
> Marc-André, why is bytes_read != len a programming error?
>
> Why is returning safe?
It's "safe" as it returns -1 to indicate an error to post_load callback.
Hmm, it may not be just a programming error. read_all() may return
success with less bytes than requested.
Here, replacing it with full error_report() may be more appropriate,
since possibly the condition could happen if the input stream is
malformed. I can send a patch.
g_return* would be fine if it was just a programming error (checking
read_all contract for example).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-17 15:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-17 15:14 Use of g_return_if_fail(), g_return_val_if_fail() Markus Armbruster
2020-11-17 15:34 ` Marc-André Lureau [this message]
2020-11-17 17:02 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAMxuvaxYacr6mcQZjqnG4GtmpGPbLbw-UMkumJyQZZCtDJhh2Q@mail.gmail.com \
--to=marcandre.lureau@redhat.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).