Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] monitor: fix expected qmp_capabilities error description regression

[Eric Blake]

On 03/23/2018 10:50 AM, Marc-André Lureau wrote:

> > If we are going to remove below chunk, how about do it in prettier
> > way instead of hacking around the error again?  Like:
> >
> > diff --git a/monitor.c b/monitor.c
> > index 77f4c41cfa..849fa23bf9 100644
> > --- a/monitor.c
> > +++ b/monitor.c
> > @@ -1203,8 +1203,14 @@ static bool qmp_cmd_oob_check(Monitor *mon, QDict *req, 
> > Error **errp)
> >
> >       cmd = qmp_find_command(mon->qmp.commands, command);
> >       if (!cmd) {
> > -        error_set(errp, ERROR_CLASS_COMMAND_NOT_FOUND,
> > -                  "The command %s has not been found", command);
> > +        if (mon->qmp.commands == &qmp_cap_negotiation_commands) {
> > +            error_set(errp, ERROR_CLASS_COMMAND_NOT_FOUND,
> > +                      "Expecting capabilities negotiation "
> > +                      "with 'qmp_capabilities'");
> > +        } else {
> > +            error_set(errp, ERROR_CLASS_COMMAND_NOT_FOUND,
> > +                      "The command %s has not been found", command);
> > +        }
> >           return false;
> >       }
> >
> > What do you think?

Yes, that looks nicer.

> >
>
> Works for me (fwiw, I'll probably need the replace "hack" again,
> because in the RFC series I am about to send, the code is factored out
> / generalized in qmp-dispatch), but that works in the meantime, please
> send a patch.

There have been quite a few patch ideas across multiple threads related 
to OOB fallout.  Hopefully I can keep straight which patches are 
intended for 2.12 (anything that fixes a bug, like this one, is a good 
candidate, and it would be nice if we can undo the temporary reversion 
of exposing OOB if we can solve all the issues that iotests exposed).

--
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org