Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: > On Wed, 27 May 2020 at 15:12, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: >> * PATCH 08: in a realize method. Can't actually fail, so let's use >> &error_abort. >> >> * PATCH 09 (this one): likewise. > > I disagree with these. We're in a realize function, the API > says "on errors, report them via the Error* you got passed", > so we should do that, not blow up. &error_abort only makes > sense if (a) we have no better way to report errors than > to abort (which isn't the case here) or (b) if we can guarantee > that in fact the thing we're doing won't ever fail
I detest impossible (and therefore untestable) error paths. > (which we can't here without knowing more about the internal > implementation details of the MOS6522 device than we > really ought to). At least the child devices are all defined in the same file. My second line of defense: my patches are strict improvments. If you want further improvements, I'd prefer you propose them as patches on top of mine.
