Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] error: passing a negative value to an os_errno is wrong

[SeokYeon Hwang]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Markus Armbruster [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Monday, November 10, 2014 10:21 PM
> To: SeokYeon Hwang
> Cc: address@hidden; address@hidden; address@hidden;
> address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] error: passing a negative value to an
> os_errno is wrong
> 
> SeokYeon Hwang <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Markus Armbruster [mailto:address@hidden
> >> Sent: Monday, November 10, 2014 6:33 PM
> >> To: SeokYeon Hwang
> >> Cc: address@hidden; address@hidden;
> >> address@hidden; address@hidden
> >> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] error: passing a negative value
> >> to an os_errno is wrong
> >>
> >> SeokYeon Hwang <address@hidden> writes:
> >>
> >> > Added 'assert(os_errno > 0)' in 'error_set_errno()'.
> >> > Fixed errno since it passes wrong value to 'error_set_errno()'.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: SeokYeon Hwang <address@hidden>
> >> > ---
> >> >  hw/pci/pcie.c | 2 +-
> >> >  util/error.c  | 1 +
> >> >  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/hw/pci/pcie.c b/hw/pci/pcie.c index 58455bd..2902f7d
> >> > 100644
> >> > --- a/hw/pci/pcie.c
> >> > +++ b/hw/pci/pcie.c
> >> > @@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ static void
> >> > pcie_cap_slot_hotplug_common(PCIDevice
> >> *hotplug_dev,
> >> >          /* the slot is electromechanically locked.
> >> >           * This error is propagated up to qdev and then to HMP/QMP.
> >> >           */
> >> > -        error_setg_errno(errp, -EBUSY, "slot is electromechanically
> >> locked");
> >> > +        error_setg_errno(errp, EBUSY, "slot is electromechanically
> >> > + locked");
> >> >      }
> >> >  }
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/util/error.c b/util/error.c index 2ace0d8..6c9d995
> >> > 100644
> >> > --- a/util/error.c
> >> > +++ b/util/error.c
> >> > @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ void error_set_errno(Error **errp, int os_errno,
> >> ErrorClass err_class,
> >> >          return;
> >> >      }
> >> >      assert(*errp == NULL);
> >> > +    assert(os_errno >= 0);
> >> >
> >> >      err = g_malloc0(sizeof(*err));
> >>
> >> The first hunk could still go into 2.2 as a bug fix.  The rest can't.
> >> You could post just the first hunk as "[PATCH for-2.2] pci: Don't
> >> pass negative errno to error_set_errno()", with my R-by.
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <address@hidden>
> >
> > Did you mean separate this patch into two patches ??
> > One is "PATCH v4" and the other is "PATCH for-2.2". Am I right??
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > And I have a question. (I don't know review / merge process well.)
> > What happens to the "reviewed" but "not bug-fix" patch during "feature
> > freeze" time ??
> 
> They get applied when the next development cycle opens.  If they don't,
> you have to remind the maintainer(s).

I just posted separated two patches.
Thank you for your advice.