On 25 April 2014 11:44, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: > Using error_is_set(ERRP) to find out whether a function failed is > either wrong, fragile, or unnecessarily opaque. It's wrong when ERRP > may be null, because errors go undetected when it is. It's fragile > when proving ERRP non-null involves a non-local argument. Else, it's > unnecessarily opaque (see commit 84d18f0). > > I guess the error_is_set(errp) in the DeviceClass realize() methods > are merely fragile right now, because I can't find a call chain that > passes a null errp argument. > > Make the code more robust and more obviously correct: receive the > error in a local variable, then propagate it through the parameter. > > Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> thanks -- PMM
