From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0696B1FF138 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2026 10:47:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E46A7314E7; Wed, 18 Mar 2026 10:47:22 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <9f4cf875-5b5c-4343-851f-8a65fc5879da@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 10:47:15 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH qemu 1/2] update submodule and patches to QEMU 10.2.1 To: Thomas Lamprecht , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260312114417.82984-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> <20260312114417.82984-2-f.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1773827197928 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -1.061 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.408 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.819 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.903 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: TTO6M6ZBCALGB6NKHOPAMXULYTJ4IFE5 X-Message-ID-Hash: TTO6M6ZBCALGB6NKHOPAMXULYTJ4IFE5 X-MailFrom: f.ebner@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Am 17.03.26 um 5:58 PM schrieb Thomas Lamprecht: > Am 12.03.26 um 13:13 schrieb Fiona Ebner: >> @@ -715,7 +715,12 @@ index 0000000000..56e0fa6c69 >> + >> + migration_incoming_state_destroy(); >> + if (ret < 0) { >> -+ error_setg_errno(errp, -ret, "Error while loading VM state"); >> ++ if (local_err) { >> ++ error_setg_errno(errp, -ret, "Error while loading VM state - %s", >> ++ error_get_pretty(local_err)); > > Would we need to free the local_err here? But in any case a tiny nit > and not really relevant in terms of leaking memory due to being in > a rather unlikely error branch. Yes, you are right. If error_propagate() is not used, a local error must be freed. There are quite a few more instances where errors are not freed in the surrounding code. There is an error_propagate_prepend() helper that could be used. Should I send a v2 or a follow-up? >> ++ } else { >> ++ error_setg_errno(errp, -ret, "Error while loading VM state"); >> ++ } >> + goto the_end; >> + } >> + >