Re: [PATCH 09/24] macio: Fix to realize "mos6522-cuda" and "mos6522-pmu" devices

[Markus Armbruster]

Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> writes:

> On 27/05/20 17:05, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> I disagree with these. We're in a realize function, the API
>> says "on errors, report them via the Error* you got passed",
>> so we should do that, not blow up. &error_abort only makes
>> sense if (a) we have no better way to report errors than
>> to abort (which isn't the case here) or (b) if we can guarantee
>> that in fact the thing we're doing won't ever fail
>> (which we can't here without knowing more about the internal
>> implementation details of the MOS6522 device than we
>> really ought to).
>
> Note however that before replacing &error_abort with error propagation
> you need to make sure that you are "un-realizing" yourself properly.  So
> it may be better to have inferior (but clearly visible) error
> propagation behavior, than untested (and perhaps untestable) buggy code
> that looks great on the surface.

This is exactly why I have to stop at &error_abort in this series.  It's
24 patches of fixes to enable 50+ patches of refactoring, with more in
the pipeline.  If I stray even deeper into the weeds, my pipeline is
going to explode %-}