Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv3 8/9] pseries: Clean up error reporting in ppc_spapr_init()

[David Gibson]

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:31:42AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 18.01.2016 05:24, David Gibson wrote:
> > This function includes a number of explicit fprintf()s for errors.
> > Change these to use error_report() instead.
> > 
> > Also replace the single exit(EXIT_FAILURE) with an explicit exit(1), since
> > the latter is the more usual idiom in qemu by a large margin.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: David Gibson <address@hidden>
> > ---
> >  hw/ppc/spapr.c | 25 +++++++++++++------------
> >  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr.c b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> > index 148ca5a..58f26cd 100644
> > --- a/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> > +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> > @@ -1789,8 +1789,8 @@ static void ppc_spapr_init(MachineState *machine)
> >      }
> >  
> >      if (spapr->rma_size > node0_size) {
> > -        fprintf(stderr, "Error: Numa node 0 has to span the RMA 
> > (%#08"HWADDR_PRIx")\n",
> > -                spapr->rma_size);
> > +        error_report("Numa node 0 has to span the RMA (%#08"HWADDR_PRIx")",
> > +                     spapr->rma_size);
> >          exit(1);
> >      }
> >  
> > @@ -1856,10 +1856,10 @@ static void ppc_spapr_init(MachineState *machine)
> >          ram_addr_t hotplug_mem_size = machine->maxram_size - 
> > machine->ram_size;
> >  
> >          if (machine->ram_slots > SPAPR_MAX_RAM_SLOTS) {
> > -            error_report("Specified number of memory slots %" PRIu64
> > -                         " exceeds max supported %d",
> > -                         machine->ram_slots, SPAPR_MAX_RAM_SLOTS);
> > -            exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
> > +            error_report("Specified number of memory slots %"
> > +                         PRIu64" exceeds max supported %d",
> > +                machine->ram_slots, SPAPR_MAX_RAM_SLOTS);
> 
> Why did you change the indentation of the "machine->ram_slots, ..." line
> here? The original looked better to me.

I don't know.  Probably just a mistake on my part, I'll fix it.

> > +            exit(1);
> 
> EXIT_FAILURE still seems to be used quite often in the QEMU sources...
> All in all, this hunk does not really change anything from a functional
> point of view, so I'd like to suggest to omit this hunk completely
> instead to avoid code churn here.

This I'll keep, as Markus says for local consistency.

-- 
David Gibson                    | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au  | minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
                                | _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature