Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 2/2] qemu: Use same create/define overwrite logic for migration prepare.

On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 03:06:59PM -0500, Cole Robinson wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Cole Robinson <crobinso(a)redhat.com&gt; > --- > src/qemu/qemu_driver.c | 30 ++++-------------------------- > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c b/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c > index 20621d1..53f7398 100644 > --- a/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c > +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c > @@ -5978,19 +5978,8 @@ qemudDomainMigratePrepareTunnel(virConnectPtr dconn, > /* Target domain name, maybe renamed. */ > dname = dname ? dname : def->name; > > - /* Ensure the name and UUID don't already exist in an active VM */ > - vm = virDomainFindByUUID(&driver->domains, def->uuid); > - > - if (!vm) vm = virDomainFindByName(&driver->domains, dname); > - if (vm) { > - if (virDomainObjIsActive(vm)) { > - qemudReportError(dconn, NULL, NULL, VIR_ERR_OPERATION_FAILED, > - _("domain with the same name or UUID already exists as '%s'"), > - vm->def->name); > - goto cleanup; > - } > - virDomainObjUnlock(vm); > - } > + if (virDomainObjIsDuplicate(&driver->domains, def, 1) < 0) > + goto cleanup; > > if (!(vm = virDomainAssignDef(dconn, > driver->caps, > @@ -6202,19 +6191,8 @@ qemudDomainMigratePrepare2 (virConnectPtr dconn, > /* Target domain name, maybe renamed. */ > dname = dname ? dname : def->name; > > - /* Ensure the name and UUID don't already exist in an active VM */ > - vm = virDomainFindByUUID(&driver->domains, def->uuid); > - > - if (!vm) vm = virDomainFindByName(&driver->domains, dname); > - if (vm) { > - if (virDomainObjIsActive(vm)) { > - qemudReportError (dconn, NULL, NULL, VIR_ERR_OPERATION_FAILED, > - _("domain with the same name or UUID already exists as '%s'"), > - vm->def->name); > - goto cleanup; > - } > - virDomainObjUnlock(vm); > - } > + if (virDomainObjIsDuplicate(&driver->domains, def, 1) < 0) > + goto cleanup; > > if (!(vm = virDomainAssignDef(dconn, > driver->caps, Hum, there is a slight change of semantic in that case, if VM migrated from A to B, then gets renamed on B, if you try to migrate it back to A that will fail because the uuid match/name mismatch failure will be raised while this won't be the case with current code, right ? Maybe it's the right thing to do, but that's a change I think Daniel