On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 6:31 AM, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: > Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> writes: > >> On 05.02.2018 07:33, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>> Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> writes: >>> >>>> On 03.02.2018 09:43, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>>>> From: Alistair Francis <alistair.fran...@xilinx.com> >>>>> >>>>> Convert fprintf(stderr, ...) to use qemu_log(). Double prints in >>>>> target/ppc/translate.c were manually remove. A fprintf() in >>>>> target/sh4/translate.c was kept as it's inside a #if 0. The #if 0 and >>>>> fflush() was removed around the unimplemented log in >>>>> target/sh4/translate.c as well. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.fran...@xilinx.com> >>>>> [Trivial conflict with 6f1c2af641d resolved] >>>>> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org> >>>>> --- >>>>> target/cris/translate.c | 2 +- >>>>> target/ppc/translate.c | 36 ++++++++++-------------------------- >>>>> target/sh4/translate.c | 7 ++----- >>>>> target/unicore32/translate.c | 2 +- >>>>> 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/target/cris/translate.c b/target/cris/translate.c >>>>> index f51a731db9..ff31311ed0 100644 >>>>> --- a/target/cris/translate.c >>>>> +++ b/target/cris/translate.c >>>>> @@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ typedef struct DisasContext { >>>>> >>>>> static void gen_BUG(DisasContext *dc, const char *file, int line) >>>>> { >>>>> - fprintf(stderr, "BUG: pc=%x %s %d\n", dc->pc, file, line); >>>>> + qemu_log("BUG: pc=%x %s %d\n", dc->pc, file, line); >>>>> if (qemu_log_separate()) { >>>>> qemu_log("BUG: pc=%x %s %d\n", dc->pc, file, line); >>>>> } >>>> >>>> This one is still logging twice now. >>> >>> Hmm. >>> >>>>> diff --git a/target/ppc/translate.c b/target/ppc/translate.c >>>>> index 4132f67bb1..172c9f2001 100644 >>>>> --- a/target/ppc/translate.c >>>>> +++ b/target/ppc/translate.c >>>>> @@ -3933,12 +3933,8 @@ static inline void gen_op_mfspr(DisasContext *ctx) >>>>> * allowing userland application to read the PVR >>>>> */ >>>>> if (sprn != SPR_PVR) { >>>>> - fprintf(stderr, "Trying to read privileged spr %d >>>>> (0x%03x) at " >>>>> - TARGET_FMT_lx "\n", sprn, sprn, ctx->nip - 4); >>>>> - if (qemu_log_separate()) { >>>>> - qemu_log("Trying to read privileged spr %d (0x%03x) >>>>> at " >>>>> - TARGET_FMT_lx "\n", sprn, sprn, ctx->nip - >>>>> 4); >>>>> - } >>>>> + qemu_log("Trying to read privileged spr %d (0x%03x) at " >>>>> + TARGET_FMT_lx "\n", sprn, sprn, ctx->nip - 4); >>>> >>>> I wonder whether that should maybe rather be a >>>> qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR, ...) instead? Well, but maybe that's >>>> subject to another patch... >>> >>> qemu_log_separate() appears to be always used like this >>> >>> fprintf(stderr, ... the message ...); >>> if (qemu_log_separate()) { >>> qemu_log(... the same message ...); >>> } >>> >>> Are you proposing to replace this pattern by >>> >>> qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR, ...the message ...); >>> >>> ? >> >> Not globally, only in target/ppc/translate.c. The wrong accesses to SPR >> (special purpose registers) there indicate that the guest has likely >> tried to do something wrong. >> >> Globally, I wonder whether it still makes sense to keep the >> qemu_log_separate() stuff - we rather want to get rid of all fprintfs, >> don't we? > > The qemu_log_separate() pattern feels wrong to me. If we have a class > of messages that should go to stderr in addition to the log (unless the > two are the same), then we should have a log level / mask / function / > whatever to do that. > > To expedite merging of the rest of the series, I'll drop this patch from > it. > > Alistair, would you be willing to work with Thomas to revise this patch?
Yeah, I'm happy to. What do we think then? Just swap to qemu_log_mask() and error_report()? Or do we need something more? Alistair >