On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 20:09:03 +0100
Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote:
> Am 18.12.2013 18:00, schrieb Luiz Capitulino:
> > From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>
> > Reviewed-By: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitul...@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > qom/object.c | 9 +++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/qom/object.c b/qom/object.c
> > index fc19cf6..68fe07a 100644
> > --- a/qom/object.c
> > +++ b/qom/object.c
> > @@ -988,17 +988,22 @@ static void object_finalize_child_property(Object
> > *obj, const char *name,
> > void object_property_add_child(Object *obj, const char *name,
> > Object *child, Error **errp)
> > {
> > + Error *local_err = NULL;
> > gchar *type;
> >
> > type = g_strdup_printf("child<%s>",
> > object_get_typename(OBJECT(child)));
> >
> > object_property_add(obj, name, type, object_get_child_property,
> > - NULL, object_finalize_child_property, child, errp);
> > -
> > + NULL, object_finalize_child_property, child,
> > &local_err);
> > + if (error_is_set(&local_err)) {
>
> I've been told we shouldn't error_is_set() that way but instead write:
> if (local_err) {
We've talked about adopting an idiom, and the general consensus seems
to be checking the error pointer straight is better than calling
error_is_set(). I'm OK with both ways and didn't consider rejecting
a patch because of that.
> No need to respin, but giving me a chance to ack this QOM patch would've
> been nice.
Oh, sorry for that. As I was preparing a pull request and as this
series got two Reviewed-bys (mine and Igor's) I just included it.
>
> Andreas
>
> > + error_propagate(errp, local_err);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > object_ref(child);
> > g_assert(child->parent == NULL);
> > child->parent = obj;
> >
> > +out:
> > g_free(type);
> > }
> >
> >
>
>
