From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41177)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1Zw5P7-00049T-1y
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 04:39:53 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1Zw5P6-0000f7-82
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 04:39:52 -0500
From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
References: <1446909925-12201-1-git-send-email-drjones@redhat.com>
	<CAFEAcA_Pk7_MourHFc-SLCQ-StTfc8ssZ_Kz6HahE5=9bxMHyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<87twovpqg1.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<CAFEAcA8rsWg=9ZV75ZmJYPrPznUH-bQObvzHUem1Tciv3_5CaA@mail.gmail.com>
	<87oaf3jww7.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<CAFEAcA8Rh9ts2r-nMGbNm7Y=SpdxL4gv0ch3CBWOHiHTRMeztg@mail.gmail.com>
	<878u67atv0.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<CAFEAcA-z6NzyGkXqG27seP9G5c8qAL-MwY0QCPT1qZhfq6DZ+g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 10:39:44 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA-z6NzyGkXqG27seP9G5c8qAL-MwY0QCPT1qZhfq6DZ+g@mail.gmail.com>
	(Peter Maydell's message of "Tue, 10 Nov 2015 09:31:15 +0000")
Message-ID: <87y4e6xkf3.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw/arm/virt: error_report cleanups
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>, qemu-arm@nongnu.org, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes:

> On 9 November 2015 at 18:52, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes:
>>> Thanks, I had missed this useful improvement to the API.
>>> How does it work in cases like this where we don't have
>>> an Error* to fill in?
>>
>> You do what error_report_err() would do had you had an Error *err to
>> fill in:
>
>> In other words, you print the error message proper with error_report(),
>> and the additional information with error_printf().
>
> ...so in conclusion Andrew's patch is correct as it stands
> and I should just apply it? :-)

Yes.  It got my R-by :)