Daniel P Berrange writes: [...] > I don't think this "Errors in user inputs" vs "Other errors" distinction > really makes sense. Whether an error raised in a piece of code is related > to user input or not is almost impossible to determine in practice. So as > a rule to follow it is not practical.
> AFAIK, include/qemu/error-report.h is the historical failed experiment > in structured error reporting, while include/qapi/error.h is the new > preferred error reporting system that everything should be using. > On this basis, I'd simply say that include/qemu/error-report.h is > legacy code that should no longer be used, and that new code should > use include/qapi/error.h exclusively and existing code converted > where practical. Mmmm, I've just reviewed both headers and you sound partially right. AFAIU, "qemu/error-report.h" contains the additional logic to manage "input locations", not present anywhere else. Also, you state that only the reporting functions in "qemu/error.h" should be used. Since "qemu/error.h" internally uses 'error_report()' (from "qemu/error-report.h"), it includes the input location information (if any). So, I will simply refer to "qemu/error.h" for the general reporting functions, plus the location management functions in "qemu/error-report.h". Does this sound to follow the expected flow of latest QEMU? Thanks, Lluis -- "And it's much the same thing with knowledge, for whenever you learn something new, the whole world becomes that much richer." -- The Princess of Pure Reason, as told by Norton Juster in The Phantom Tollbooth
