On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 04:31:28PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 03:54:30PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
The s/1/-1/ fix induces no semantic change, since the sole use of virStateActive tests solely for nonzero.
From 4bc9713207a2ed6b101e2067f7bba82d1df45987 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jim Meyering <meyering@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:52:55 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] libvirt.c: fix virStateActive return value; document some new functions
* src/libvirt.c (virStateActive): Return -1 upon error, not 1, to be consistent with the other virState* functions. (virStateActive, virStateCleanup, virStateReload, virStateActive): Add per-function comments.
NACK.
+/** + * virStateActive + * + * Run each virtualization driver's "active" method. + * + * Return 0 if successful, -1 upon error. + */ int virStateActive(void) { int i, ret = 0;
for (i = 0 ; i < virStateDriverTabCount ; i++) { if (virStateDriverTab[i]->active && virStateDriverTab[i]->active()) - ret = 1; + ret = -1;
This is *not* an error condition. This method is basically asking whether the driver is 'active' - eg, does it have any domains running. It returns 0 if it isn't active, or 1 if it is active.
There is no error scenario - it can never fail.
Then that should be explained in the (missing) comment! Still +1 for other parts of that patch including the comments I assume, Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ daniel@veillard.com | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ http://veillard.com/ | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/