From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <d.tschlatscher@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BC9F919B3
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 22 Dec 2022 15:22:45 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id F1D061C652
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 22 Dec 2022 15:22:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
[94.136.29.106])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 22 Dec 2022 15:22:13 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1E620446D4
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 22 Dec 2022 15:22:13 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <2d073550-d5ed-391a-a5c9-076208829a52@proxmox.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 15:22:11 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
References: <20221216133655.510957-1-d.tschlatscher@proxmox.com>
<20221216133655.510957-4-d.tschlatscher@proxmox.com>
<1671620408.1e4qgx6uw7.astroid@yuna.none>
<a348bbc4-e5d1-cc6d-b5bc-1e51d5358f2d@proxmox.com>
<1671714998.zcf0qv7i9n.astroid@yuna.none>
From: Daniel Tschlatscher <d.tschlatscher@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <1671714998.zcf0qv7i9n.astroid@yuna.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 0.460 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
NICE_REPLY_A -1.148 Looks like a legit reply (A)
SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server v3 3/5] await and kill lingering
KVM thread when VM start reaches timeout
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 14:22:45 -0000
On 12/22/22 14:20, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> On December 22, 2022 1:58 pm, Daniel Tschlatscher wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> - my $exitcode = run_command($cmd, %run_params);
>>>> - if ($exitcode) {
>>>> - if ($tpmpid) {
>>>> - warn "stopping swtpm instance (pid $tpmpid) due to QEMU startup error\n";
>>>> - kill 'TERM', $tpmpid;
>>>> + eval {
>>>> + my $exitcode = run_command($cmd, %run_params);
>>>> +
>>>> + if ($exitcode) {
>>>> + if ($tpmpid) {
>>>> + log_warn "stopping swtpm instance (pid $tpmpid) due to QEMU startup
>>> error\n";
>>>
>>> this warn -> log_warn change kind of slipped in, it's not really part of this
>>> patch?
>>
>> Because I changed this line anyway, I changed it to log_warn as it is
>> imported already and, as I understood, the preferable alternative
>> to calling 'warn'.
>> Sourcing this in it's own patch seems overkill to me, or would you
>> rather suggest something like this should be handled in, e.g. a
>> file-encompassing refactoring?
>
> ideally it could be sent as cleanup patch up-front (then it can be applied even
> if the rest needs another round ;)) or at least mentioned somewhere (e.g., in
> the patch notes). seemingly unrelated changes in a patch always make me wary that
> the patch was generated from some unclean tree/more or less than intended was
> `git add`ed. in this case my guess was that you just changed that (wrapped) call
> site to match your newly introduced ones, but it could also have been an
> unintentional search+replace result, for example, so I'd rather ask :)
As the v2 still used the 'warn' calls, I mentioned it under the "Changes
from v2" section. 'Changed warn to use 'log_warn' instead'. (Albeit
wasn't at my best with this wording here)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pve-devel mailing list
> pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
> https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
>
>