On 07/14/2015 10:37 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
There's this condition:
flags & VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_CURRENT && virDomainIsActive(dom)
which can never be true since VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_CURRENT has hardcoded value of zero. Therefore virDomainIsActive() is a dead code. However, the condition could make sense if it is rewritten as the following:
!(flags & VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_CONFIG) && virDomainIsActive(dom)
Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com> --- tools/virsh-domain.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
I had seen and filtered locally but didn't send since I was working through perhaps removing some sa_assert()'s
diff --git a/tools/virsh-domain.c b/tools/virsh-domain.c index ac04ded..f7edeeb 100644 --- a/tools/virsh-domain.c +++ b/tools/virsh-domain.c @@ -6499,7 +6499,7 @@ cmdVcpuPin(vshControl *ctl, const vshCmd *cmd)
if (got_vcpu && vcpu >= ncpus) { if (flags & VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE || - (flags & VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_CURRENT && + (!(flags & VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_CONFIG) && virDomainIsActive(dom) == 1))
Wouldn't another option be: (current && virDomainIsActive(dom) == 1) Which is what I think was trying to be tested anyway ACK to both patches in any case, John
vshError(ctl, _("vcpu %d is out of range of live cpu count %d"),