Re: [PATCH 11/16] nvme: factor out block backend setup

[Klaus Birkelund Jensen]

On Apr 15 12:52, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 4/15/20 12:24 PM, Klaus Jensen wrote:
> > From: Klaus Jensen <address@hidden>
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Klaus Jensen <address@hidden>
> > ---
> >   hw/block/nvme.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
> >   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/hw/block/nvme.c b/hw/block/nvme.c
> > index e67f578fbf79..f0989cbb4335 100644
> > --- a/hw/block/nvme.c
> > +++ b/hw/block/nvme.c
> > @@ -1348,6 +1348,17 @@ static void nvme_init_state(NvmeCtrl *n)
> >       n->cq = g_new0(NvmeCQueue *, n->params.max_ioqpairs + 1);
> >   }
> > +static int nvme_init_blk(NvmeCtrl *n, Error **errp)
> > +{
> > +    blkconf_blocksizes(&n->conf);
> > +    if (!blkconf_apply_backend_options(&n->conf, 
> > blk_is_read_only(n->conf.blk),
> > +                                       false, errp)) {
> > +        return -1;
> > +    }
> > +
> > +    return 0;
> 
> I'm not sure this is a correct usage of the 'propagating errors' API (see
> CODING_STYLE.rst and include/qapi/error.h), I'd expect this function to
> return void, and use a local_error & error_propagate() in nvme_realize().
> 
> However this works, so:
> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden>
> 

So, I get that and did use the propagate functionality earlier. But I
still used the int return. I'm not sure about the style if returning
void - should I check if errp is now non-NULL? Point is that I need to
return early since the later calls could fail if previous calls did not
complete successfully.