Re: [PATCH 3/5] hw/core: Remove uses of QERR_DEVICE_NO_HOTPLUG

[Markus Armbruster]

Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> writes:

> QERR_DEVICE_NO_HOTPLUG definition is obsolete since 2015 (commit
> 4629ed1e989, "qerror: Finally unused, clean up"). Replace the two
> uses and drop the definition.
>
> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
> ---
>  include/qapi/qmp/qerror.h | 3 ---
>  hw/core/qdev.c            | 3 ++-
>  softmmu/qdev-monitor.c    | 2 +-
>  3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/qapi/qmp/qerror.h b/include/qapi/qmp/qerror.h
> index 596fce0c54e..f49ae01cdb0 100644
> --- a/include/qapi/qmp/qerror.h
> +++ b/include/qapi/qmp/qerror.h
> @@ -26,9 +26,6 @@
>  #define QERR_DEVICE_IN_USE \
>      "Device '%s' is in use"
>  
> -#define QERR_DEVICE_NO_HOTPLUG \
> -    "Device '%s' does not support hotplugging"
> -
>  #define QERR_FEATURE_DISABLED \
>      "The feature '%s' is not enabled"
>  
> diff --git a/hw/core/qdev.c b/hw/core/qdev.c
> index 7f06403752d..14375861c36 100644
> --- a/hw/core/qdev.c
> +++ b/hw/core/qdev.c
> @@ -734,7 +734,8 @@ static void device_set_realized(Object *obj, bool value, 
> Error **errp)
>      static int unattached_count;
>  
>      if (dev->hotplugged && !dc->hotpluggable) {
> -        error_setg(errp, QERR_DEVICE_NO_HOTPLUG, object_get_typename(obj));
> +        error_setg(errp, "Device '%s' does not support hotplugging",
> +                   object_get_typename(obj));
>          return;
>      }
>  
> diff --git a/softmmu/qdev-monitor.c b/softmmu/qdev-monitor.c
> index 4851de51a5c..35a885a6623 100644
> --- a/softmmu/qdev-monitor.c
> +++ b/softmmu/qdev-monitor.c
> @@ -896,7 +896,7 @@ void qdev_unplug(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)
>      }
>  
>      if (!dc->hotpluggable) {
> -        error_setg(errp, QERR_DEVICE_NO_HOTPLUG,
> +        error_setg(errp, "Device '%s' does not support hotplugging",
>                     object_get_typename(OBJECT(dev)));
>          return;
>      }

When the same error is detected in multiple places, I like to ask myself
whether the code calls for a refactoring.  But I can't see a useful one
here.

Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>