Cornelia Huck <coh...@redhat.com> writes: > On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 07:51:04 +0200 > Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> writes: >> >> > On 24.04.20 21:20, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> >> Commit e47970f51d "s390x/cpumodel: Fix query-cpu-model-FOO error API >> >> violations" neglected to change visit_end_struct()'s Error ** argument >> >> along with the others. If visit_end_struct() failed, we'd take the >> > >> > s/visit_end_struct/visit_check_struct/ ? >> >> Will fix. >> >> >> success path. Fortunately, it can't fail here: >> >> qobject_input_check_struct() checks we consumed the whole dictionary, >> >> and to get here, we did. Fix it anyway. >> > >> > AFAIKs, if visit_check_struct() failed, we'd still do the memcopy, but >> > also report the error. Not nice, not bad. >> > >> > Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> >> >> Thanks! > > Will you queue this, or shall I queue it?
Me taking the complete series through my tree would be easiest for me. But I can cope with other maintainers picking up bits.
