On 31 July 2012 10:45, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Igor Mitsyanko <i.mitsya...@samsung.com> writes:
>> @@ -1510,7 +1508,7 @@ void sd_write_data(SDState *sd, uint8_t value)
>> return;
>>
>> if (sd->state != sd_receivingdata_state) {
>> - fprintf(stderr, "sd_write_data: not in Receiving-Data state\n");
>> + fprintf(stderr, "sd_write_card_data: not in Receiving-Data
>> state\n");
>
> Outside this patch's scope, but here goes anyway: what kind of condition
> is reported here? Programming error that should never happen? Guest
> doing something weird?
This particular case I think is "SD card controller model tried
to do something wrong".
> Same for all the other fprintf(stderr, ...) in this file.
Various uses:
* guest legitimately did something we feel like telling the user
about (eg "Card force-erased by CMD42")
* guest did something dubious but with defined semantics
("Unknown CMD", trying to do something when the card is locked)
* guest did something legitimate but unimplemented
* underlying block layer read/write failed (and we are about
to throw away the error rather than reporting it anywhere else!)
These would all be worth tidying up some day when we have a
sensible logging infrastructure to tidy them up into.
-- PMM
