On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 06:37:25PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> now cpu_x86_init() does nothing more or less
> than duplicating cpu_generic_init() logic.
> So simplify it by using cpu_generic_init().
>
> Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com>
Awesome.
It bothers me that we're replacing a function with consistent
error reporting with one where error reporting is inconsistent.
cpu_generic_init() sometimes prints error messages, and sometimes
simply returns NULL without printing anything.
But fixing that would require reviewing all cpu_init()
implementations. In the meantime, we are being as inconsistent as
all the other architectures that already use cpu_generic_init(),
so:
Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com>
> ---
> target-i386/cpu.c | 20 +-------------------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/target-i386/cpu.c b/target-i386/cpu.c
> index c31afc7..238f69d 100644
> --- a/target-i386/cpu.c
> +++ b/target-i386/cpu.c
> @@ -2240,25 +2240,7 @@ out:
>
> X86CPU *cpu_x86_init(const char *cpu_model)
> {
> - Error *error = NULL;
> - X86CPU *cpu;
> -
> - cpu = cpu_x86_create(cpu_model, &error);
> - if (error) {
> - goto out;
> - }
> -
> - object_property_set_bool(OBJECT(cpu), true, "realized", &error);
> -
> -out:
> - if (error) {
> - error_report_err(error);
> - if (cpu != NULL) {
> - object_unref(OBJECT(cpu));
> - cpu = NULL;
> - }
> - }
> - return cpu;
> + return X86_CPU(cpu_generic_init(TYPE_X86_CPU, cpu_model));
> }
>
> static void x86_cpu_cpudef_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void *data)
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
--
Eduardo
