On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 07:27:24AM +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 07:30:38AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > >On 07/17/2014 10:49 PM, Jincheng Miao wrote: > >>Implement InitInternal functions for Mutex, RWLock and Cond, these functions > >>contain error report using virReportSystemErrorFull, it is controlled by > >>an argument 'quite'. > >>The related macros are Init and InitQuite, they call InitInternal function > >>by passing 'false' or 'true' to quite argument. > > > >After your patch 2, do we really have any callers that use the quiet > >version? This seems like the sort of patch where ALL callers should be > >noisy (especially since the failure is so rare, but also means we are > >quite hosed if it happens). What are the callers that you intend to be > >quiet, and what is the justification for them being quiet? > > > > I think there are few callers that error out with VIR_ERROR(), but > most of them just return -1 with no apparent reason. I'm not sure > about few class initializations (virOnceInit) and driver > initializations. Do we want to be loud on that front as well? Yes, global initializers must always report proper errors - these are captured & reported on every call even though the initializer is only run once. So yes, I think everything should be noisy in this case - there's no legitimate reason with these fnuctions why you would want to be quiet and/or ignore failure. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list