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

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v2 1/9] vbox: Add various vir*Flags API

On 7/10/19 6:50 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 7/10/19 2:02 AM, Peter Krempa wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 12:46:30 -0500, Eric Blake wrote:
>>> Even though we don't accept any flags, it is unfriendly to callers
>>> that use the modern API to have to fall back to the flag-free API.
>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake redhat com>
>>> ---

>>> -vboxDomainSave(virDomainPtr dom, const char *path ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>>> +vboxDomainSaveFlags(virDomainPtr dom, const char *path ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
>>> +                    const char *dxml, unsigned int flags)
>>>  {
>>>      vboxDriverPtr data = dom->conn->privateData;
>>>      IConsole *console = NULL;
>>> @@ -564,6 +565,9 @@ vboxDomainSave(virDomainPtr dom, const char *path ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>>>      nsresult rc;
>>>      int ret = -1;
>>> +    virCheckFlags(0, -1);
>>> +    virCheckNonNullArgReturn(dxml, -1);
>> This reports: invalid argument: dxml in vboxDomainSave must not be NULL

Revisiting this thread:

internal.h has:

virCheckNullArgGoto      (complains if argument is not NULL)
virCheckNonNullArgReturn (complains if argument is NULL)
virCheckNonNullArgGoto   (complains if argument is NULL)

but is missing virCheckNullArgReturn, which is the form I really meant
to use here. I have no idea if that missing macro is intentional, but it
would be easy enough to add.

>> I'm not certain that the internal function name makes sense to external
>> users.
> In which case I can hand-roll a more specific error instead of reusing
> the common macro. But I do see pre-existing uses of
> virCheckNonNullArgXXX in src/esx and src/vz prior to this patch, so it's
> not the first time we've used the common macros.

Directly calling virReportInvalidNonNullArg() would be the only way to
hand-roll this properly, but no one outside of internal.h and
src/util/virobject.c uses it.  I'd prefer to sick with

>>> +static int
>>> +vboxDomainSave(virDomainPtr dom, const char *path)
>>> +{
>>> +    return vboxDomainSaveFlags(dom, path, NULL, 0);
>> So, this passes NULL 'dxml' into vboxDomainSaveFlags which explicitly
>> rejects it. What's the point?
>> Ah I see. Was the above supposed to be virCheckNullArgGoto?
> D'oh. Yes, I got it backwards.  The function wants to succeed only if
> the user omitted the optional dxml argument.
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3226
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

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