From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50920) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dQFgo-0005XH-LZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 12:19:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dQFgi-0003Bq-Ty for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 12:19:38 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:38704) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dQFgi-0003Bj-Nc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 12:19:32 -0400 Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 17:19:27 +0100 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Message-ID: <20170628161927.GQ29134@redhat.com> Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" References: <4e1eded5cda7b182a8a4cb133b40b2915817b7d1.1498596157.git.alistair.francis@xilinx.com> <20170628090448.GE29134@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC v1 2/3] util/qemu-error: Add a warning_report() function List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alistair Francis Cc: "qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" , Markus Armbruster On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 09:16:45AM -0700, Alistair Francis wrote: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:04 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 01:45:45PM -0700, Alistair Francis wrote: > >> Add a functino which can be used similarly to error_report() execpt to > >> inform the users about warnings instead of errors. > >> > >> The warning print does not include the timestamp and instead will > >> preface the messages with a 'warning: '. > > > > Not including the timestamp is a bug IMHO. If I've turned on timestamps, > > I expect all messages to have the timestamp. > > That's fine, I'm happy to add it back in. I just wasn't sure. > > > > > I'm not particularly convinced by adding the 'warning: ' prefix either, > > particularly given the scenario you are using this in, is not actually > > a warning - its just a informative message. > > Maybe it makes more sense to add an extra argument to error_report() > that can be used to specify error, warning or information. The same > way qemu_log_mask() works. That was Edgar's idea in reply to one of > the other patches. > > Does that sound more useful? I'd suggest renaming the current 'error_report' to 'message_report' and making it take an extra arg that accepts a enum flag INFO | WARNING | ERROR. Then add macros for error_report, warning_report, info_report that call message_report with the right enum. That way you don't have to update any of the existing code that calls error_report. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|