Hi Jano,
Your suggestion makes more sense.
Let me send a V2 then.
Tks :-)
--
Julio Cesar Faracco
Em ter., 27 de out. de 2020 às 12:24, Ján Tomko <jtomko(a)redhat.com> escreveu:
On a Tuesday in 2020, Julio Faracco wrote:
>Function to compare CPU on 64-bit PowerPC is ignoring the flag to avoid
>failure in case of CPUs (host and guest) are incompatible. Basically, the
>function is returning -1 even if it is set to continue.
>
>Signed-off-by: Julio Faracco <jcfaracco(a)gmail.com>
>---
> src/cpu/cpu_ppc64.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/src/cpu/cpu_ppc64.c b/src/cpu/cpu_ppc64.c
>index 2fedcd25da..23ea5a6a3e 100644
>--- a/src/cpu/cpu_ppc64.c
>+++ b/src/cpu/cpu_ppc64.c
>@@ -517,7 +517,7 @@ virCPUppc64Compare(virCPUDefPtr host,
> virCPUDefPtr cpu,
> bool failIncompatible)
> {
>- virCPUCompareResult ret;
>+ virCPUCompareResult ret = -1;
> g_autofree char *message = NULL;
>
> if (!host || !host->model) {
>@@ -528,7 +528,7 @@ virCPUppc64Compare(virCPUDefPtr host,
> VIR_WARN("unknown host CPU");
> ret = VIR_CPU_COMPARE_INCOMPATIBLE;
This would be easier to read with each of the if/else
branches having their own return with the constant.
No need to assing to ret just to return it in the next
statement.
> }
>- return -1;
VIR_CPU_COMPARE_ERROR has the value of -1
Jano
>+ return ret;
> }
>
> ret = ppc64Compute(host, cpu, NULL, &message);
>--
>2.25.1
>