Re: [libvirt] [PATCH REPOST 3/5] admin: Introduce virAdmServerGetClientProcessingControls
> diff --git a/daemon/admin_server.c b/daemon/admin_server.c
> index 9f40688..79437a1 100644
> --- a/daemon/admin_server.c
> +++ b/daemon/admin_server.c
> @@ -311,3 +311,44 @@ int adminClientClose(virNetServerClientPtr client,
> virNetServerClientClose(client);
> return 0;
> }
> +
> +int
> +adminServerGetClientProcessingControls(virNetServerPtr srv,
> + virTypedParameterPtr *params,
> + int *nparams,
> + unsigned int flags)
> +{
> + int ret = -1;
> + int maxparams = 0;
> + virTypedParameterPtr tmpparams = NULL;
> +
> + virCheckFlags(0, -1);
> +
> + if (virTypedParamsAddUInt(&tmpparams, nparams, &maxparams,
> + VIR_SERVER_CLIENTS_MAX,
> + virNetServerGetMaxClients(srv)) < 0)
> + goto cleanup;
> +
> + if (virTypedParamsAddUInt(&tmpparams, nparams, &maxparams,
> + VIR_SERVER_CLIENTS_CURRENT,
> + virNetServerGetCurrentClients(srv)) < 0)
> + goto cleanup;
> +
> + if (virTypedParamsAddUInt(&tmpparams, nparams, &maxparams,
> + VIR_SERVER_CLIENTS_UNAUTH_MAX,
> + virNetServerGetMaxUnauthClients(srv)) < 0)
> + goto cleanup;
> +
> + if (virTypedParamsAddUInt(&tmpparams, nparams, &maxparams,
> + VIR_SERVER_CLIENTS_UNAUTH_CURRENT,
> + virNetServerGetCurrentUnauthClients(srv)) < 0)
> + goto cleanup;
Well, all of these are type of size_t in our implementation. Should we
make these ULL?
I don't think that's necessary. In my understanding, this is strongly
affected by the max number of allowed file descriptors per process, and
since 'fd' is int, ULL would be a slight overkill and think UINT will
suffice.
I will of course fix your other notes to this patch/
Erik