Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v2] test_driver: implement virDomainGetInterfaceParameters
On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 10:46:32AM +0200, Ilias Stamatis wrote:
On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 9:11 AM Erik Skultety
<eskultet(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:01:04PM +0200, Ilias Stamatis wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Ilias Stamatis <stamatis.iliass(a)gmail.com>
> > ---
> >
> > The only thing changed since v1 is calling virDomainObjGetOneDef to get
> > the appropriate def pointer.
> >
> > src/test/test_driver.c | 104 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 104 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/test/test_driver.c b/src/test/test_driver.c
> > index 4b1f2724a0..dd756ed8bd 100755
> > --- a/src/test/test_driver.c
> > +++ b/src/test/test_driver.c
> > @@ -1964,6 +1964,109 @@ static int testDomainGetInfo(virDomainPtr domain,
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > +
> > +static int
> > +testDomainGetInterfaceParameters(virDomainPtr dom,
> > + const char *device,
> > + virTypedParameterPtr params,
> > + int *nparams,
> > + unsigned int flags)
> > +{
> > + size_t i;
> > + virDomainObjPtr vm = NULL;
> > + virDomainDefPtr def = NULL;
> > + virDomainNetDefPtr net = NULL;
> > + int ret = -1;
> > +
> > + virCheckFlags(VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE |
> > + VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_CONFIG |
> > + VIR_TYPED_PARAM_STRING_OKAY, -1);
> > +
> > + if ((*nparams) == 0) {
> > + *nparams = 7;
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (!(vm = testDomObjFromDomain(dom)))
> > + return -1;
> > +
> > + if (!(def = virDomainObjGetOneDef(vm, flags)))
> > + goto cleanup;
> > +
> > + if (!(net = virDomainNetFind(def, device)))
> > + goto cleanup;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < *nparams && i < 7; i++) {
> > + switch (i) {
> > + case 0: /* inbound.average */
> > + if (virTypedParameterAssign(¶ms[i],
> > + VIR_DOMAIN_BANDWIDTH_IN_AVERAGE,
> > + VIR_TYPED_PARAM_UINT, 0) < 0)
> > + goto cleanup;
> > + if (net->bandwidth && net->bandwidth->in)
> > + params[i].value.ui = net->bandwidth->in->average;
> > + break;
>
> Okay, we'll need a macro ^here too. Contrary to what I said in the
> response to the other GetXParameters, we don't need to make the macro
> too generic to suit every need, since in ^this particular case, we
> could also place the 'if' clause in it too.
>
> Regards,
> Erik
Or we could collect the values in the beginning and then use the
generic macro I suggested on the other e-mail. What do you think?
Sure, we could do that as well.
Erik