Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] storage_backend_fs.c: do not ignore probe failure
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 10:40:26AM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
When virStorageBackendProbeTarget fails, it returns -1 or -2.
The two uses below obviously intended to handle those cases
differently, but due to a wrong comparison, they always treated a
"real" (e.g., open) failure (-1) just like an ignorable "wrong file
type"
failure (-2).
FYI, coverity reported that the "goto cleanup" statement was
unreachable, which was true in each case, but hardly the real problem.
@@ -562,7 +562,7 @@ virStorageBackendFileSystemRefresh(virConnectPtr
conn,
&backingStore,
&vol->allocation,
&vol->capacity,
- &vol->target.encryption) < 0))
{
+ &vol->target.encryption) != 0))
{
if (ret == -1)
goto cleanup;
else {
@@ -603,7 +603,7 @@ virStorageBackendFileSystemRefresh(virConnectPtr conn,
if ((ret = virStorageBackendProbeTarget(conn,
&vol->backingStore,
NULL, NULL, NULL,
- NULL)) < 0) {
+ NULL)) != 0) {
if (ret == -1)
goto cleanup;
else {
I don't understand how this is making any difference. The method
virStorageBackendProbeTarget can return 0, -1 or -2, so
virStorageBackendProbeTarget < 0 catches the -1 and -2 cases
virStorageBackendProbeTarget != 0 catches the -1 and -2 cases
I only see this change making a difference if one of the error return values
is a positive integer greater than 0, but we don't have that here. What am
I missing ?
Daniel
--
|: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|