Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 07/10] pseries: Clean up error handling in spapr_rtas_register()

[Alexey Kardashevskiy]

On 01/20/2016 09:58 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 01/15/2016 05:00 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> > The errors detected in this function necessarily indicate bugs in the rest
> > of the qemu code, rather than an external or configuration problem.
> >
> > So, a simple assert() is more appropriate than any more complex error
> > reporting.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: David Gibson <address@hidden>
> > ---
> >   hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c | 12 +++---------
> >   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
> > index 34b12a3..0be52ae 100644
> > --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
> > +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
> > @@ -648,17 +648,11 @@ target_ulong spapr_rtas_call(PowerPCCPU *cpu, 
> > sPAPRMachineState *spapr,
> >
> >   void spapr_rtas_register(int token, const char *name, spapr_rtas_fn fn)
> >   {
> > -    if (!((token >= RTAS_TOKEN_BASE) && (token < RTAS_TOKEN_MAX))) {
> > -        fprintf(stderr, "RTAS invalid token 0x%x\n", token);
> > -        exit(1);
> > -    }
> > +    assert((token >= RTAS_TOKEN_BASE) && (token < RTAS_TOKEN_MAX));
>
> You could drop the redundant () while touching this, as in:


Seriously? Why? I personally find it really annoying (but I stay silent) 
when people omit braces in cases like this.


> assert(token >= RTAS_TOKEN_BASE && token < RTAS_TOKEN_MAX);


--
Alexey