| Message ID | 20240229143914.1977550-18-zhao1.liu@linux.intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Cleanup up to fix missing ERRP_GUARD() for error_prepend() | expand |
On 29/02/2024 15.39, Zhao Liu wrote: > From: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com> > > As the comment in qapi/error, passing @errp to error_prepend() requires > ERRP_GUARD(): > > * = Why, when and how to use ERRP_GUARD() = > * > * Without ERRP_GUARD(), use of the @errp parameter is restricted: > ... > * - It should not be passed to error_prepend(), error_vprepend() or > * error_append_hint(), because that doesn't work with &error_fatal. > * ERRP_GUARD() lifts these restrictions. > * > * To use ERRP_GUARD(), add it right at the beginning of the function. > * @errp can then be used without worrying about the argument being > * NULL or &error_fatal. > > ERRP_GUARD() could avoid the case when @errp is the pointer of > error_fatal, the user can't see this additional information, because > exit() happens in error_setg earlier than information is added [1]. > > In target/s390x/cpu_models.c, there're 2 functions passing @errp to > error_prepend() without ERRP_GUARD(): > - check_compatibility() > - s390_realize_cpu_model() > > Though both their @errp parameters point to their callers' local @err > virables and don't cause the issue as [1] said, to follow the > requirement of @errp, also add missing ERRP_GUARD() at their beginning. > > [1]: Issue description in the commit message of commit ae7c80a7bd73 > ("error: New macro ERRP_GUARD()"). > > Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> > Cc: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> > Cc: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> > Cc: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com> > --- > target/s390x/cpu_models.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu_models.c b/target/s390x/cpu_models.c > index a63d990e4e8e..1a1c09612271 100644 > --- a/target/s390x/cpu_models.c > +++ b/target/s390x/cpu_models.c > @@ -503,6 +503,7 @@ static void error_prepend_missing_feat(const char *name, void *opaque) > static void check_compatibility(const S390CPUModel *max_model, > const S390CPUModel *model, Error **errp) > { > + ERRP_GUARD(); > S390FeatBitmap missing; > > if (model->def->gen > max_model->def->gen) { > @@ -566,6 +567,7 @@ S390CPUModel *get_max_cpu_model(Error **errp) > > void s390_realize_cpu_model(CPUState *cs, Error **errp) > { > + ERRP_GUARD(); > Error *err = NULL; I think that function could use an additional clean-up now: Remove the local "err" variable and use "errp" only instead. Thomas > S390CPUClass *xcc = S390_CPU_GET_CLASS(cs); > S390CPU *cpu = S390_CPU(cs);
> > diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu_models.c b/target/s390x/cpu_models.c > > index a63d990e4e8e..1a1c09612271 100644 > > --- a/target/s390x/cpu_models.c > > +++ b/target/s390x/cpu_models.c > > @@ -503,6 +503,7 @@ static void error_prepend_missing_feat(const char *name, void *opaque) > > static void check_compatibility(const S390CPUModel *max_model, > > const S390CPUModel *model, Error **errp) > > { > > + ERRP_GUARD(); > > S390FeatBitmap missing; > > if (model->def->gen > max_model->def->gen) { > > @@ -566,6 +567,7 @@ S390CPUModel *get_max_cpu_model(Error **errp) > > void s390_realize_cpu_model(CPUState *cs, Error **errp) > > { > > + ERRP_GUARD(); > > Error *err = NULL; > > I think that function could use an additional clean-up now: Remove the local > "err" variable and use "errp" only instead. > Thanks! It's cleaner. Will do this. Regards, Zhao
On 08/03/2024 11.12, Zhao Liu wrote: > Hi Thomas, > >>> void s390_realize_cpu_model(CPUState *cs, Error **errp) >>> { >>> + ERRP_GUARD(); >>> Error *err = NULL; >> >> I think that function could use an additional clean-up now: Remove the local >> "err" variable and use "errp" only instead. >> > > Since many cases check @err to determine if the callee function fails, > it's better also make those functions reture something like boolean > instead of void. Then we could avoid checking @err/@errp. > > Thus, the remaining cleanups include: > * related conversion of local @err to @errp and > * make the callee function return someting, > > I can do these centrally in another series, and this series (part 1 + > part 2, 33 patches in total) will only be used for adding ERRP_GUARD(), > which makes it easier to review as well as easier to merge. > > Do you agree? ;-) Fine for me. Thomas
Hi Thomas, > > void s390_realize_cpu_model(CPUState *cs, Error **errp) > > { > > + ERRP_GUARD(); > > Error *err = NULL; > > I think that function could use an additional clean-up now: Remove the local > "err" variable and use "errp" only instead. > Since many cases check @err to determine if the callee function fails, it's better also make those functions reture something like boolean instead of void. Then we could avoid checking @err/@errp. Thus, the remaining cleanups include: * related conversion of local @err to @errp and * make the callee function return someting, I can do these centrally in another series, and this series (part 1 + part 2, 33 patches in total) will only be used for adding ERRP_GUARD(), which makes it easier to review as well as easier to merge. Do you agree? ;-) Thanks, Zhao
diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu_models.c b/target/s390x/cpu_models.c index a63d990e4e8e..1a1c09612271 100644 --- a/target/s390x/cpu_models.c +++ b/target/s390x/cpu_models.c @@ -503,6 +503,7 @@ static void error_prepend_missing_feat(const char *name, void *opaque) static void check_compatibility(const S390CPUModel *max_model, const S390CPUModel *model, Error **errp) { + ERRP_GUARD(); S390FeatBitmap missing; if (model->def->gen > max_model->def->gen) { @@ -566,6 +567,7 @@ S390CPUModel *get_max_cpu_model(Error **errp) void s390_realize_cpu_model(CPUState *cs, Error **errp) { + ERRP_GUARD(); Error *err = NULL; S390CPUClass *xcc = S390_CPU_GET_CLASS(cs); S390CPU *cpu = S390_CPU(cs);