qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] qerror: Add QERR_PROPERTY_SET_AFTER_REALIZE


From: Luiz Capitulino
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] qerror: Add QERR_PROPERTY_SET_AFTER_REALIZE
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:03:58 -0300

On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 13:59:06 +0200
Markus Armbruster <address@hidden> wrote:

> Peter Maydell <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > On 18 July 2012 12:19, Markus Armbruster <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> Peter Maydell <address@hidden> writes:
> >>
> >>> n 18 July 2012 11:20, Andreas Färber <address@hidden> wrote:
> >>>> Am 16.07.2012 17:25, schrieb Peter Maydell:
> >>>>> Add a new QError QERR_PROPERTY_SET_AFTER_REALIZE for attempts
> >>>>> to set a QOM or qdev property after the object/device has been
> >>>>> realized. This allows a slightly more informative diagnostic
> >>>>> than the previous "permission denied" message.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <address@hidden>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> Changes since the v1 (which was sent way back in March...):
> >>>>>  * rebased on master now a pile of qdev/qom changesd have landed
> >>>>>  * fixed some overlong lines
> >>>>>  * avoid gcc '?:' extension
> >>>>>  * a couple of set_ functions in qdev-properties.c are new since v1
> >>>>>    and needed their QERR_PERMISSION_DENIED checks changing
> >>>>
> >>>> This does not yet seem to take into account the discussion with libvirt
> >>>> and Anthony on what parameters to pass. The ID generalization was
> >>>> nack'ed by Anthony and a QOM path was suggested as alternative. Could
> >>>> you please look into that?
> >>>
> >>> I'm afraid I'm not really sure what you're referring to here --
> >>> do you have a link to a discussion?
> >>>
> >>> All I want is for errors printed to the user to be a bit more
> >>> helpful; the whole qerror infrastructure seems to make it
> >>> somewhere between difficult and impossible to do that :-(
> >>
> >> Yup.  One of the reasons why I detest it.
> >>
> >> A recent thread on how to recover from this disaster:
> >> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2012-06/msg03469.html
> >
> > That's interesting but I'm not sure how it's relevant. We already
> > have QERR_PROPERTY values just this new one, so I don't see why
> > this is any worse than the ones we have. If we come up with some
> > new scheme we can convert this with all the rest. And I don't
> > really want to block "improve this error message" on getting
> > agreement for some big redesign effort...
> 
> I'm not objecting to your patch (I didn't even review it), just pointing
> out there's a glimmer of hope on the "emitting error messages fit for
> humans is somewhere between difficult and impossible" front.

Yeah, I plan to fix that soon.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]