Re: [PATCH 28/52] migration/rdma: Check negative error values the same way everywhere

Peter Xu writes: > On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 07:45:00AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Peter Xu writes: >> >> > Sorry Zhijian, I missed this email. >> > >> > On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 06:32:14PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote: >> >> > * Avoid non-negative integer error values. >> > >> > Perhaps we

Re: [PATCH 28/52] migration/rdma: Check negative error values the same way everywhere

On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 07:45:00AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Peter Xu writes: > > > Sorry Zhijian, I missed this email. > > > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 06:32:14PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote: > >> > * Avoid non-negative integer error values. > > > > Perhaps we need to forbid that if doing

Re: [PATCH 28/52] migration/rdma: Check negative error values the same way everywhere

Peter Xu writes: > Sorry Zhijian, I missed this email. > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 06:32:14PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote: >> > * Avoid non-negative integer error values. > > Perhaps we need to forbid that if doing this. > > I can see Zhijian's point, where "if (ret)" can also capture unexpected >

Re: [PATCH 28/52] migration/rdma: Check negative error values the same way everywhere

Sorry Zhijian, I missed this email. On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 06:32:14PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote: > > * Avoid non-negative integer error values. Perhaps we need to forbid that if doing this. I can see Zhijian's point, where "if (ret)" can also capture unexpected positive returns, while "if (ret

Re: [PATCH 28/52] migration/rdma: Check negative error values the same way everywhere

Markus Armbruster wrote: > "Zhijian Li (Fujitsu)" writes: > >> On 18/09/2023 22:41, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>> When a function returns 0 on success, negative value on error, >>> checking for non-zero suffices, but checking for negative is clearer. >>> So do that. >>> >> >> This patch is no my

Re: [PATCH 28/52] migration/rdma: Check negative error values the same way everywhere

"Zhijian Li (Fujitsu)" writes: > On 18/09/2023 22:41, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> When a function returns 0 on success, negative value on error, >> checking for non-zero suffices, but checking for negative is clearer. >> So do that. >> > > This patch is no my favor convention. Certainly a matte

Re: [PATCH 28/52] migration/rdma: Check negative error values the same way everywhere

On 18/09/2023 22:41, Markus Armbruster wrote: > When a function returns 0 on success, negative value on error, > checking for non-zero suffices, but checking for negative is clearer. > So do that. > This patch is no my favor convention. @Peter, Juan I'd like to hear your opinions. Thanks Zhi

[PATCH 28/52] migration/rdma: Check negative error values the same way everywhere

When a function returns 0 on success, negative value on error, checking for non-zero suffices, but checking for negative is clearer. So do that. Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster --- migration/rdma.c | 82 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 41 delet