[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] fix virsh dominfo returns error when virNodeGetSecurityModel() is not supported.



On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:20:16PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 06:08:36PM +0900, Tatsuro Enokura wrote:
> > Hi all
> > 
> > I try virsh dominfo in upstream libvirt on xen machine,
> > the commands returns -1 as follows:
> 
> Opps, thanks for reporting this problem - surprised it slipped
> past our testing for so long !
>  
> > [root vmi20 ~]# virsh dominfo rhel53rc2_pv_sdb3
> > Id:             1
> > Name:           rhel53rc2_pv_sdb3
> > UUID:           05ba9be8-f4e9-e208-11c7-fc936655cd8e
> > OS Type:        linux
> > State:          idle
> > CPU(s):         2
> > CPU time:       8.8s
> > Max memory:     1048576 kB
> > Used memory:    716800 kB
> > Autostart:      disable
> > error: this function is not supported by the hypervisor:
> > virNodeGetSecurityModel
> > 
> > [root vmi20 ~]# echo $?
> > 1
> > 
> > The explanation of virNodeGetSecurityModel() and
> > virNodeGetSecurityModel() in libvirt.c is return -2
> > when hypervisor drivers don't support these operations.
> > But these functions return -1 in this case, and so
> > cmdDominfo() in virsh.c returns FALSE.
> 
> This API description about returning -1 vs -2 is totally bogus.
> With the remote driver we only have a boolean success vs fail
> status, so there is no way to return 2 different error codes. In
> addition already have a way to report methods which are not
> supported, by giving back a VIR_ERR_NO_SUPPORT code, so there is
> no need for a special '-2' value in any case.
> 
> > I make a patch.
> >   - virNodeGetSecurityModel() and virNodeGetSecurityModel()
> >     return -2 when drivers don't supprted these operations.
> >   - In CmdDominfo(), it is no operation when virNodeGetSecurityModel()
> >     and virNodeGetSecurityModel() return -2.
> 
> I'm attaching a alternate patch which just checks for the 
> VIR_ERR_NO_SUPPORT code and simply ignores that error.
> This should deal with the error scenario you saw with Xen.
> 
> I'm also fixing the API description to match reality and
> adding in several missing 'memset()' calls, because the
> drivers should not assume the caller has zero'd these
> structs.

  Looks fine, ACK,

    thanks !

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
daniel veillard com  | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
http://veillard.com/ | virtualization library  http://libvirt.org/


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]