[libvirt] [PATCH] test_driver: implement virDomainSetLifecycleAction

Erik Skultety eskultet at redhat.com
Tue Aug 13 14:01:36 UTC 2019


On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 03:07:50PM +0300, Ilias Stamatis wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 3:55 PM Erik Skultety <eskultet at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 11:51:05AM +0200, Ilias Stamatis wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Ilias Stamatis <stamatis.iliass at gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >  src/test/test_driver.c | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 58 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/src/test/test_driver.c b/src/test/test_driver.c
> > > index aae9875194..71d6baa3da 100755
> > > --- a/src/test/test_driver.c
> > > +++ b/src/test/test_driver.c
> > > @@ -7404,6 +7404,63 @@ testDomainMemoryPeek(virDomainPtr dom,
> > >  }
> > >
> > >
> > > +static void
> > > +testDomainModifyLifecycleAction(virDomainDefPtr def,
> > > +                                virDomainLifecycle type,
> > > +                                virDomainLifecycleAction action)
> > > +{
> > > +    switch (type) {
> > > +    case VIR_DOMAIN_LIFECYCLE_POWEROFF:
> > > +        def->onPoweroff = action;
> > > +        break;
> > > +    case VIR_DOMAIN_LIFECYCLE_REBOOT:
> > > +        def->onReboot = action;
> > > +        break;
> > > +    case VIR_DOMAIN_LIFECYCLE_CRASH:
> > > +        def->onCrash = action;
> > > +        break;
> > > +    case VIR_DOMAIN_LIFECYCLE_LAST:
> > > +        break;
> > > +    }
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +
> > > +static int
> > > +testDomainSetLifecycleAction(virDomainPtr dom,
> > > +                             unsigned int type,
> > > +                             unsigned int action,
> > > +                             unsigned int flags)
> > > +{
> > > +    virDomainObjPtr vm = NULL;
> > > +    virDomainDefPtr def = NULL;
> > > +    virDomainDefPtr persistentDef = NULL;
> > > +    int ret = -1;
> > > +
> > > +    virCheckFlags(VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE |
> > > +                  VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_CONFIG, -1);
> > > +
> > > +    if (!virDomainDefLifecycleActionAllowed(type, action))
> > > +        return -1;
> > > +
> > > +    if (!(vm = testDomObjFromDomain(dom)))
> > > +        return -1;
> > > +
> > > +    if (virDomainObjGetDefs(vm, flags, &def, &persistentDef) < 0)
> >
> > We should use virDomainObjGetOneDef instead.
>
> I think not. Because the 2 flags aren't mutually exclusive for this
> API. So the user might want to affect both the persistent and the live
> config at the same time with a single call.
>
> What do you think?

Good point, it can stay then.

Regards,
Erik




More information about the libvir-list mailing list