From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55015) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d1Tys-0001qB-8n for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 04:32:00 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d1Tyr-0002MB-8h for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 04:31:54 -0400 Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 09:31:37 +0100 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Message-ID: <20170421083137.GD27925@redhat.com> Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" References: <20170420040003.31074-1-famz@redhat.com> <20170420153016.GI3227@redhat.com> <20170420203250.GI4747@noname.redhat.com> <87pog61fjr.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87pog61fjr.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] sheepdog: Set error when connection fails List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Markus Armbruster Cc: Kevin Wolf , sheepdog@lists.wpkg.org, qemu-block@nongnu.org, Hitoshi Mitake , Jeff Cody , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Max Reitz , Liu Yuan , Fam Zheng On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 07:43:36AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Kevin Wolf writes: > > > Am 20.04.2017 um 17:30 hat Daniel P. Berrange geschrieben: > >> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 12:00:03PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote: > >> > Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng > >> > --- > >> > block/sheepdog.c | 1 + > >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >> > > >> > diff --git a/block/sheepdog.c b/block/sheepdog.c > >> > index fb9203e..7e889ee 100644 > >> > --- a/block/sheepdog.c > >> > +++ b/block/sheepdog.c > >> > @@ -608,6 +608,7 @@ static int connect_to_sdog(BDRVSheepdogState *s, Error **errp) > >> > qemu_set_nonblock(fd); > >> > } else { > >> > fd = -EIO; > >> > + error_setg(errp, "Failed to connect to sheepdog server"); > >> > } > >> > >> This doesn't make much sense to me. The lines just above the > >> diff context have this: > >> > >> fd = socket_connect(s->addr, errp, NULL, NULL); > >> > >> socket_connect should have already reported an error on "errp" > >> in the scenario that 'fd == -1'. > > > > By the way, am I the only one who thinks that having errp anywhere else > > than as the last argument is bad style? I can easily see myself missing > > that this functions sets it because the last argument is NULL. > > Yes, it's bad style because it's suprising. Worth fixing. In fact we can simply delete the last two arguments to socket_connect() entirely. Most code is now switched over to use QIOChannel APIs, so we don't have anything which uses the non-blocking connect feature of socket_connect() anymore. 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 :|