qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] Error propagation in generated visitors and command mar


From: Markus Armbruster
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Error propagation in generated visitors and command marshallers
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 10:24:03 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux)

"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <address@hidden> writes:

> * Markus Armbruster (address@hidden) wrote:
>> I stumbled over this while trying to purge error_is_set() from the code.
>
>> Here's how we commonly use the Error API:
>> 
>>     Error *err = NULL;
>> 
>>     foo(arg, &err)
>>     if (err) {
>>         goto out;
>>     }
>>     bar(arg, &err)
>>     if (err) {
>>         goto out;
>>     }
>> 
>> This ensures that err is null on entry, both for foo() and for bar().
>> Many functions rely on that, like this:
>> 
>>     void foo(ArgType arg, Error **errp)
>>     {
>>         if (frobnicate(arg) < 0) {
>>             error_setg(errp, "Can't frobnicate");
>>                                 // This asserts errp != NULL
>>         }
>>     }
>> 
>> 
>> Here's how some of our visitor code uses the Error API (for real code,
>> check out generated qmp-marshal.c):
>> 
>>     Error *err = NULL;
>>     QmpInputVisitor *mi = qmp_input_visitor_new_strict(QOBJECT(args));
>>     Visitor *v = qmp_input_get_visitor(mi);
>>     char *foo = NULL;
>>     char *bar = NULL;
>> 
>>     visit_type_str(v, &foo, "foo", &err);
>>     visit_type_str(v, &bar, "bar", &err);
>>     if (err) {
>>         goto out;
>>     }
>> 
>> Unlike above, this may pass a non-null errp to the second
>> visit_type_str(), namely when the first one fails.
>
> Right, one of the problems is you just have long strings of visit_* calls
> and adding a check to each one hides what you're actually doing in a sea
> of checks.  The downside is that if one of those visit's fails then you've
> got no chance of figuring out which one it was.
>
> In my BER world I've got some macros along the lines of:
>
> #define LOCAL_ERR_REPORT(fallout) \
>     if (local_err) { \
>         fallout \
>     }
>
> and at least then I can do things like:
>    visit_type_str(v, &foo, "foo", &err);
>    LOCAL_ERR_REPORT( goto out; )
>    visit_type_str(v, &bar, "bar", &err);
>    LOCAL_ERR_REPORT( goto out; )
>
> which while not nice,

Understatement :)

>                       means that you can actually follow the code, and
> I can also add a printf to the macro to record the function/line so
> that when one of them fails I can see which visit was the cause of the problem
> (something that's currently very difficult).
>
>> The visitor functions guard against that, like this:
>> 
>>     void visit_type_str(Visitor *v, char **obj, const char *name, Error 
>> **errp)
>>     {
>>         if (!error_is_set(errp)) {
>>             v->type_str(v, obj, name, errp);
>>         }
>>     }
>> 
>> As discussed before, error_is_set() is almost almost wrong, fragile or
>> unclean.  What if errp is null?  Then we fail to stop visiting after an
>> error.
>> 
>> The function could be improved like this:
>> 
>>     void visit_type_str(Visitor *v, char **obj, const char *name, Error 
>> **errp)
>>     {
>>         assert(errp);
>>         if (!*errp) {
>>             v->type_str(v, obj, name, errp);
>>         }
>>     }
>> 
>> 
>> But: is it a good idea to have both patterns in the code?  Should we
>> perhaps use the common pattern for visiting, too?  Like this:
>> 
>>     visit_type_str(v, &foo, "foo", &err);
>>     if (err) {
>>         goto out;
>>     }
>>     visit_type_str(v, &bar, "bar", &err);
>>     if (err) {
>>         goto out;
>>     }
>> 
>> Then we can assume *errp is clear on function entry, like this:
>> 
>>     void visit_type_str(Visitor *v, char **obj, const char *name, Error 
>> **errp)
>>     {
>>         v->type_str(v, obj, name, errp);
>>     }
>> 
>> Should execute roughly the same number of conditional branches.
>> 
>> Tedious repetition of "if (err) goto out" in the caller, but that's what
>> we do elsewhere, and unlike elsewhere, these one's are generated.
>
> The other problem is I had a tendency to typo some of the cases to
> if (*err)  and it's quite hard to spot and you wonder what's going on.

The only help I can offer with that is naming conventions: use "errp"
only for Error ** variables, and "err" only for Error *.

I have patches in my queue to clean up current usage.



reply via email to

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