On 09/30/2015 12:01 AM, Luyao Huang wrote:
Commit 1c24cfe9 fix the problem in virNumaSetPagePoolSize, this patch just like it and fix the issue in another function.
when user use freepages and specify a invalid node or page size, will get error like this:
# virsh freepages 0 1 error: Failed to open file '/sys/devices/system/node/node0/hugepages/hugepages-1kB/free_hugepages': No such file or directory
Add two checks to catch this and therefore produce much more friendlier error messages.
Signed-off-by: Luyao Huang <lhuang@redhat.com> --- src/util/virnuma.c | 12 ++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
Perhaps the more entertaining part of this patch is/was it possible to use "freepages 0 0"? Before patch 1, before patch 2, after patch 2. Based on the answer to the question below, I can adjust the commit message (and code if necessary) a bit in order to remove the really long line and make it flow better.
diff --git a/src/util/virnuma.c b/src/util/virnuma.c index 8577bd8..c8beade 100644 --- a/src/util/virnuma.c +++ b/src/util/virnuma.c @@ -560,6 +560,12 @@ virNumaGetHugePageInfo(int node, page_size, "nr_hugepages") < 0) goto cleanup;
+ if (!virFileExists(path)) { + virReportError(VIR_ERR_OPERATION_FAILED, "%s", + _("page size or NUMA node not available")); + goto cleanup; + } +
Why is there no "if (node != -1 && !virNumaNodeIsAvailable(node)) {" check prior to the virNumaGetHugePageInfoPath call? <same for next change too> John
if (virFileReadAll(path, 1024, &buf) < 0) goto cleanup;
@@ -579,6 +585,12 @@ virNumaGetHugePageInfo(int node, page_size, "free_hugepages") < 0) goto cleanup;
+ if (!virFileExists(path)) { + virReportError(VIR_ERR_OPERATION_FAILED, "%s", + _("page size or NUMA node not available")); + goto cleanup; + } + if (virFileReadAll(path, 1024, &buf) < 0) goto cleanup;