Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] Improve invalid argument checks for the public API

On 05/17/2011 12:12 PM, Matthias Bolte wrote: > > The actual semantic for (n)params is not completely defined, is it? > This just matches what (most of?) the driver currently do. > >> Hmm, here we document that nparams can be <= the value returned by >> virDomainGetSchedulerType; which means it can be 0, which means that >> params can be NULL. I think we should change this to allow NULL,0 in >> input as a way of querying the proper nparams size on output. > > Why would you add a second way to query nparams? I guess the alternative is to tighten up the documentation to specifically state that nparams must be the number of parameters (and not a subset) managed by the device for Get; Set can still do subsets though.