From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41242)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alistair23@gmail.com>) id 1dxzmx-0003kg-G7
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:13:28 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alistair23@gmail.com>) id 1dxzmw-0003Qi-KS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:13:27 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: alistair23@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <adae1793-1a4a-7107-7676-f6dbaa26a9f4@redhat.com>
References: <cover.1506384414.git.alistair.francis@xilinx.com>
	<5ad72536402da2879d49b58753cc709a8ff22de9.1506384415.git.alistair.francis@xilinx.com>
	<adae1793-1a4a-7107-7676-f6dbaa26a9f4@redhat.com>
From: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@xilinx.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 11:12:54 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKmqyKN-kB964To18yv-ScHX98R61iUN5JUCyyv0JO2fqKEwxg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 8/8] target: Replace fprintf(stderr,
 "*\n" with error_report()
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Cc: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@xilinx.com>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>, Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, "Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.iglesias@gmail.com>, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>, Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>, qemu-arm <qemu-arm@nongnu.org>, "open list:New World" <qemu-ppc@nongnu.org>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, Yongbok Kim <yongbok.kim@imgtec.com>, Guan Xuetao <gxt@mprc.pku.edu.cn>, Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
List-ID: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:08 PM, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 26.09.2017 02:09, Alistair Francis wrote:
>> Replace a large number of the fprintf(stderr, "*\n" calls with
>> error_report(). The functions were renamed with these commands and then
>> compiler issues where manually fixed.
> [...]
>> @@ -9281,18 +9281,19 @@ static void init_ppc_proc(PowerPCCPU *cpu)
>>          case POWERPC_FLAG_PMM:
>>              break;
>>          default:
>> -            fprintf(stderr, "PowerPC MSR definition inconsistency\n"
>> -                    "Should define POWERPC_FLAG_PX or POWERPC_FLAG_PMM\n");
>> +            error_report("PowerPC MSR definition inconsistency");
>> +            error_printf("Should define POWERPC_FLAG_PX or POWERPC_FLAG_PMM");
>>              exit(1);
>>          }
>>      } else if (env->flags & (POWERPC_FLAG_PX | POWERPC_FLAG_PMM)) {
>> -        fprintf(stderr, "PowerPC MSR definition inconsistency\n"
>> -                "Should not define POWERPC_FLAG_PX nor POWERPC_FLAG_PMM\n");
>> +        error_report("PowerPC MSR definition inconsistency");
>> +        error_printf("Should not define POWERPC_FLAG_PX nor POWERPC_FLAG_PMM");
>>          exit(1);
>>      }
>>      if ((env->flags & (POWERPC_FLAG_RTC_CLK | POWERPC_FLAG_BUS_CLK)) == 0) {
>> -        fprintf(stderr, "PowerPC flags inconsistency\n"
>> -                "Should define the time-base and decrementer clock source\n");
>> +        error_report("PowerPC MSR definition inconsistency");
>> +        error_printf("Should define the time-base and decrementer clock"
>> +                     " source");
>>          exit(1);
>>      }
>
> Replacing fprintf with error_report+error_printf is kind of very ugly.
> While error_report adds newline to the output, error_printf does not (as
> far as I can see) ... did you check how such a message looks like when
> it is generated during runtime?
> Also, the strings belong together, so printing them with two function
> calls sound wrong to me... maybe they should be joined without newline
> in the middle instead?

Ok, that works for me, I'll do that.

Thanks,
Alistair

>
>  Thomas