Cao jin <caoj.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> writes: > On 11/27/2015 10:22 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Cao jin <caoj.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> writes: >> >>> Hi, Markus >>> >>> On 11/24/2015 06:08 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > [...] >>> >>> and this will cover to output to the monitor, right? >> >> The device still implements the old PCIDeviceClass.init() instead of the >> new .realize(). All devices need to be converted to .realize(). You >> can help by converting this one. >> >> .init() reports errors with error_report() and returns 0 on success, -1 >> on failure. >> >> .realize() passes errors to its callers via its errp argument. >> > > After reading you commit 28b07e7, I am aware of this;) Thanks very > much for your detailed explanation:) I was always curious about why > there are 2 function(.init() & .realize()) for initializing device, > now I guess I get it: it has just .init() at first, because of error > report issue, the .realize() is added to replace it, in order to pass > the error above. Do I understand it right ?
Yes! > If I understand it right, I see there are still devices initialization > using .init() of DeviceClass & PCIDeviceClass, maybe I can help to > convert some of these. That would be helpful. There are probably easy cases where you only have to convert one device model at a time, and more complex cases, where you have to convert supporting functions from error_report() to error_set(), or convert device classes, not just individual devices. Best try an easy one first. >> Commit 28b07e7 can serve as example of how to convert a device to >> realize(). There are many more. The ones I did usually have "Convert >> to realize()" in the commit message's first line. >> > >> Regarding six error paths: I counted six places that return -1 directly >> or goto err or similar. Your patch adds a suitable error message to one >> of them. The other five need one, too. You'll have to examine the >> called functions to find out whether they report anything. If they do, >> they need to be first converted to pass an Error to their callers >> instead. >> > > It seems I have a misunderstanding about the "6 error paths":-[ I > thought "error path" is a "error *reporting path*", like: fprintf the > msg to stderr is a path, while output it via QMP is also a > path. Because I did`t touch the code about -chardev/-mon/-monitor/-qmp > before, so I spent 2 days reading the code:) Welcome to the club :) > Now I am cleared, Thanks you very much for the clarifying, Markus, I > think this mistake won`t happen to me later;) And actually, I was > already thinking add suitable error msg to each error path:) Glad I could help you!
