Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] qom: Introduce object_realize_nofail()

[Paolo Bonzini]

Il 13/04/2012 16:21, Andreas Färber ha scritto:
> Am 13.04.2012 16:08, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
>> Il 13/04/2012 16:06, Andreas Färber ha scritto:
>>> I'm still talking about the (pretty clear to me) graph that I posted.
>>> There, object A's init function creates a new qdev object - . Creating
>>> an object can fail - fatally or non-fatally.
>>>
>>> And yes, exactly my point, currently initfn (first stage) cannot fail,
>>> only the second stage (DeviceClass::init). Which is why I've been saying
>>> we'll need to refactor those "fake composition" usages first before we
>>> declare that we can defer qdev initialization to vl.c.
>>
>> But why should they fail?  This is what I also asked.  If instance-init
>> is deterministic, it will either always or never fail (besides cases
>> like memory allocation which cannot really be handled correctly).
> 
> Indeed I am thinking of trivial memory allocation for starters, yes.
> This is not just a theoretical issue as I have two such reports in my
> Bugzilla already.

Are they public?  Haven't we long agreed that exit(1) is the right thing
to do on OOM?

Paolo