Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 08:17:08PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Also, please make it a function, not a macro:
>> > >
>> > > void error_report_fatal(const char *fmt, ...)
>> > > {
>> > > va_list ap;
>> > >
>> > > va_start(ap, fmt);
>> > > error_vreport(fmt, ap);
>> > > va_end(ap);
>> > > exit(1);
>> > > }
>
> Marcel (and reviewers),
>
> Now if we are having both error_report_fatal() and
> error_report_abort(), we'll write error_report() three times if we all
> take them as functions.
Yes, but all we duplicate is the usual var-arg boilerplate.
> How about we still use macro this time but leverage error_setg()
> macro as mentioned by Fam, like:
>
> +#define error_report_fatal(...) error_setg(&error_fatal, __VA_ARGS__)
> +#define error_report_abort(...) error_setg(&error_abort, __VA_ARGS__)
>
> In this case, we avoided calling exit() directly in the macro, and is
> much cleaner than writting error_report() content for three times.
I'm afraid that destroys the layering.
Currently, Error objects (util/error.c) use error reporting
(util/qemu-error.c), but not vice versa. Their headers
(include/qapi/error.h and include/qemu/error-report.h) are idependent.
I like it that way.
