Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] test_driver: implement virDomainSetLifecycleAction

On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 3:55 PM Erik Skultety <eskultet(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 11:51:05AM +0200, Ilias Stamatis wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Ilias Stamatis <stamatis.iliass(a)gmail.com&gt; > > --- > > 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?