On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 07:11:23PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> +static gboolean
> +gvir_designer_domain_has_spice_channel(GVirDesignerDomain *design)
> +{
> + GList *devices;
> + GList *it;
> + gboolean has_spice = FALSE;
> +
> + devices = gvir_designer_domain_get_device_by_type(design,
> +
GVIR_CONFIG_TYPE_DOMAIN_CHANNEL);
> + for (it = devices; it != NULL; it = it->next) {
> + GVirConfigDomainChannel *channel;
> + const char *target_name;
> + channel = GVIR_CONFIG_DOMAIN_CHANNEL(it->data);
> + target_name = gvir_config_domain_channel_get_target_name(channel);
> + if (g_strcmp0(target_name, GVIR_DESIGNER_SPICE_CHANNEL_NAME) == 0) {
> + /* FIXME could do more sanity checks (check if the channel
> + * source has the 'spicevmc' type)
> + */
> + GVirConfigDomainChannelTargetType target_type;
> + target_type = gvir_config_domain_channel_get_target_type(channel);
> + if (target_type == GVIR_CONFIG_DOMAIN_CHANNEL_TARGET_VIRTIO) {
> + has_spice = TRUE;
> + } else {
> + g_critical("Inconsistent SPICE channel, target type is wrong
(%d)",
> + target_type);
Is this really a critical issue? What about g_warning instead?
This means the domain XML has a very unexpected content, so I'd tend to tag
that as g_critical (which is not much different from g_warning anyway). I
don't mind changing it to g_warning.
Christophe