Re: [PATCH 3/3] sam460ex: Use type cast macro instead of simple cast

[Greg Kurz]

On Thu, 7 Jan 2021 10:45:26 +0100
BALATON Zoltan <balaton@eik.bme.hu> wrote:

> On Thu, 7 Jan 2021, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Jan 2021 16:24:01 +0100
> > BALATON Zoltan via <qemu-ppc@nongnu.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Use the PCI_BUS type cast macro to convert result of
> >> qdev_get_child_bus(). Also remove the check for NULL afterwards which
> >> should not be needed because sysbus_create_simple() uses error_abort
> >
> > It seems to me that sysbus_create_simple() doesn't return NULL because
> > it ends up calling object_new_with_type(). This allocates the object
> > with either g_malloc() or qemu_memalign(), both of which abort on
> > failure.
> >
> >> and PCI_BUS macro also checks its argument by default so this
> >
> > AFAICT, PCI_BUS() and all other instance type checking macros are
> > happy with a NULL argument. They simply return NULL in this case.
> 
> This wasn't my experience when I've got an error in code and got a NULL 
> pointer here (on pegasos2 board but same situation). At least with 
> qom-debug enabled (which I think is on by default unless explicitly 
> disabled in configure) this will abort if the object is not the right 
> type.
> 

You're right that qom-cast-debug is enabled by default and that it
causes object_dynamic_cast_assert() to abort on type mismatch, but
definitely not with a NULL value, as mentioned in this very old
commit:

commit b7f43fe46029d8fd0594cd599fa2599dcce0f553
Author: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri Nov 23 16:56:17 2012 +0100

    qom: dynamic_cast of NULL is always NULL
    
    Trying to cast a NULL value will cause a crash.  Returning
    NULL is also sensible, and it is also what the type-unsafe
    DO_UPCAST macro does.
    
    Reported-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
    Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
    Signed-off-by: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>

Maybe this should be documented in the function header in "qom/object.h".

> >> shouldn't fail here.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: BALATON Zoltan <balaton@eik.bme.hu>
> >> ---
> >>  hw/ppc/sam460ex.c | 7 ++-----
> >>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/hw/ppc/sam460ex.c b/hw/ppc/sam460ex.c
> >> index 14e6583eb0..cc67e9c39b 100644
> >> --- a/hw/ppc/sam460ex.c
> >> +++ b/hw/ppc/sam460ex.c
> >> @@ -384,11 +384,8 @@ static void sam460ex_init(MachineState *machine)
> >>      ppc460ex_pcie_init(env);
> >>      /* All PCI irqs are connected to the same UIC pin (cf. UBoot source) 
> >> */
> >>      dev = sysbus_create_simple("ppc440-pcix-host", 0xc0ec00000, 
> >> uic[1][0]);
> >> -    pci_bus = (PCIBus *)qdev_get_child_bus(dev, "pci.0");
> >> -    if (!pci_bus) {
> >> -        error_report("couldn't create PCI controller!");
> >> -        exit(1);
> >> -    }
> >> +    pci_bus = PCI_BUS(qdev_get_child_bus(dev, "pci.0"));
> >> +
> >
> > But PCI_BUS() is being passed qdev_get_child_bus(dev, "pci.0"), not
> > dev... so the real question here is whether this can return NULL
> > or not. And if this happens, is this a (1) user or (2) programming
> > error ?
> >
> > If (1) then the "if (!pci_bus) { }" should be kept. If (2) then
> > it should be converted to an assert().
> 
> I think it can only fail if the ppc440-pcix-host type is changed to not 
> have a pci.0 child any more which is a programming error that's very 
> unlikely to happen but if needed an assert could be added but I don't 
> think that's really necessary. The error_report was definitely not needed 
> as it's not a user error in any case.
> 

I was also thinking about a programming error. Whether to add an assert()
or not is up to you, you're the maintainer for this code :)

> Regards,
> BALATON Zoltan
> 
> >>      memory_region_init_alias(isa, NULL, "isa_mmio", get_system_io(),
> >>                               0, 0x10000);
> >>      memory_region_add_subregion(get_system_memory(), 0xc08000000, isa);
> >
> >