On 2/1/21 10:15 AM, Alex Bennée wrote: > > Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> writes: > >> On 1/30/21 12:53 AM, Claudio Fontana wrote: >>> To summarize: >>> >>> 1) accel->cpu_realizefn extends the current cpu target-specific realize >>> functions with accelerator-specific code, >>> which currently does not make use of errp at all (thus, the temptation >>> to remove errp from the interface until it is actually needed by a target). >> >> No, arm does use errp in realizefn already. >> It's just that the void return value is hinky. > > Sounds like fixing the void return would be part of a larger qdev > clean-up rather than this particular series. If I recall there have been > various phases of clean-ups and refactoring of the error code paths in > the past. > >> >> >> r~ > >
I think you are right. I added a patch in this series to at least not make the problem worse, by adding a return value to accel_cpu::cpu_realizefn, and cleaning up the only code path case that signals an error there for now in i386. (will add as the last patch in the series) Thanks, Claudio
