From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Jpm7W-0006Ji-9W
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 26 Apr 2008 11:15:22 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Jpm7U-0006Ir-Ru
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 26 Apr 2008 11:15:21 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=51033 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jpm7U-0006Ik-Kr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 26 Apr 2008 11:15:20 -0400
Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.175])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <balrogg@gmail.com>) id 1Jpm7U-0003mW-AQ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 26 Apr 2008 11:15:20 -0400
Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id m2so327609uge.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sat, 26 Apr 2008 08:15:19 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <fb249edb0804260815s367c24acv56ae9998b4acdfd6@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 17:15:19 +0200
From: "andrzej zaborowski" <balrogg@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] bdrv_flush error handling
In-Reply-To: <18413.10389.596581.127047@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <18364.19722.241175.337829@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
	<18413.10389.596581.127047@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
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: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 28/03/2008, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> On the 20th of February I wrote:
>  > bdrv_flush is declared to return void, but this is wrong because it
>  > means that the implementations have nowhere to report their errors.
>  > Indeed, the implementations generally ignore errors.
>  >
>  > This patch corrects this by making it return int (implicitly, either 0
>  > or -errno, as for other similar functions).  All of the
>  > implementations and callers are adjusted too.
>
>  There was some discussion which I think concluded that this change was
>  good but the patch doesn't seem to have been applied.

It doesn't seem to apply against qemu, I could modify it but I don't
know how block-raw-win32.c reports errors.

Regards