On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 01:42:14AM +0000, Zeng, Star wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Qemu-devel [mailto:qemu-devel- >> bounces+star.zeng=intel....@nongnu.org] On Behalf Of Wei Yang >> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 8:38 AM >> To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org >> Cc: imamm...@redhat.com; da...@redhat.com; Wei Yang >> <richardw.y...@linux.intel.com>; m...@redhat.com >> Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] memory-device: not necessary to use >> goto for the last check >> >> We are already at the last condition check. >> >> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richardw.y...@linux.intel.com> >> Reviewed-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> >> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> >> --- >> hw/mem/memory-device.c | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/hw/mem/memory-device.c b/hw/mem/memory-device.c index >> 5f2c408036..df3261b32a 100644 >> --- a/hw/mem/memory-device.c >> +++ b/hw/mem/memory-device.c >> @@ -186,7 +186,6 @@ static uint64_t >> memory_device_get_free_addr(MachineState *ms, >> if (!range_contains_range(&as, &new)) { >> error_setg(errp, "could not find position in guest address space >> for " >> "memory device - memory fragmented due to alignments"); >> - goto out; > >Is it better to return 0 (or set new_addr to 0) for this error path and >another remaining "goto out" path? >
I may not get your point. We set errp which is handled in its caller. By doing so, the error is propagated. Do I miss something? > >Thanks, >Star > >> } >> out: >> g_slist_free(list); >> -- >> 2.17.1 >> -- Wei Yang Help you, Help me
