On 06/05/2017 03:39 AM, Peter Krempa wrote:
On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 06:17:17 -0400, John Ferlan wrote:
If virObjectIsClass fails "internally" to virobject.c, create a macro to generate the VIR_WARN describing what the problem is. Also improve the checks and message a bit to indicate which was the failure - whether the obj was NULL or just not the right class
Signed-off-by: John Ferlan <jferlan@redhat.com> --- src/util/virobject.c | 16 +++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/util/virobject.c b/src/util/virobject.c index 34805d3..9f5f187 100644 --- a/src/util/virobject.c +++ b/src/util/virobject.c @@ -47,6 +47,16 @@ struct _virClass { virObjectDisposeCallback dispose; };
+#define VIR_OBJECT_USAGE_PRINT_WARNING(anyobj, objclass) \ + do { \ + virObjectPtr obj = anyobj; \ + if (!obj) \ + VIR_WARN("Object %p is not a virObject class instance", anyobj);\
Is this really helpful?
Object (nil) is not a virObject class instance.
%p does not make sense since it's always NULL, and also obviously a null pointer is not a class instance ...
True; however, if you had snipped more context: - VIR_WARN("Object %p (%s) is not a virObjectLockable instance", - anyobj, obj ? obj->klass->name : "(unknown)"); the old context used the "? ... :" and would also have said "Object (nil) (unknown) is not... " - I just went more direct and removed the assumption that it's a virObjectLockable instance. I can change the message if that's all you object to though. The goal here was the second half of the message to be more explicit. John