[libvirt] [PATCH] conf: fix forget restore ctxt->node when parse memory device success
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223631 When set a memory device in the xml, <sysinfo> in xml will be lost. Because we forgot restore ctxt->node to the oldnode after parse memory device, this will make the parse function after virDomainMemoryDefParseXML cannot find a node they need when parse a full xml(virDomainDefParseXML). Signed-off-by: Luyao Huang <lhuang@redhat.com> --- src/conf/domain_conf.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.c b/src/conf/domain_conf.c index bfdc94e..7ddc1ea 100644 --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.c +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.c @@ -11828,6 +11828,7 @@ virDomainMemoryDefParseXML(xmlNodePtr memdevNode, if (virDomainDeviceInfoParseXML(memdevNode, NULL, &def->info, flags) < 0) goto error; + ctxt->node = save; return def; error: -- 1.8.3.1
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 13:08:12 +0800, Luyao Huang wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223631
When set a memory device in the xml, <sysinfo> in xml will be lost. Because we forgot restore ctxt->node to the oldnode after parse memory device, this will make the parse function after virDomainMemoryDefParseXML cannot find a node they need when parse a full xml(virDomainDefParseXML).
The commit message is really hard to read.
Signed-off-by: Luyao Huang <lhuang@redhat.com> --- src/conf/domain_conf.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.c b/src/conf/domain_conf.c index bfdc94e..7ddc1ea 100644 --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.c +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.c @@ -11828,6 +11828,7 @@ virDomainMemoryDefParseXML(xmlNodePtr memdevNode, if (virDomainDeviceInfoParseXML(memdevNode, NULL, &def->info, flags) < 0) goto error;
+ ctxt->node = save; return def;
A test case is missing. The bugzilla link contains one so I'll add it. ACK to the code. I'll rewrite the commit message and add a test case. Peter
On 05/21/2015 03:46 PM, Peter Krempa wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 13:08:12 +0800, Luyao Huang wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223631
When set a memory device in the xml, <sysinfo> in xml will be lost. Because we forgot restore ctxt->node to the oldnode after parse memory device, this will make the parse function after virDomainMemoryDefParseXML cannot find a node they need when parse a full xml(virDomainDefParseXML). The commit message is really hard to read.
Okay, I will pay more attention about this. Maybe use the exist similar commit message as an example will be a good choice.
Signed-off-by: Luyao Huang <lhuang@redhat.com> --- src/conf/domain_conf.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.c b/src/conf/domain_conf.c index bfdc94e..7ddc1ea 100644 --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.c +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.c @@ -11828,6 +11828,7 @@ virDomainMemoryDefParseXML(xmlNodePtr memdevNode, if (virDomainDeviceInfoParseXML(memdevNode, NULL, &def->info, flags) < 0) goto error;
+ ctxt->node = save; return def; A test case is missing. The bugzilla link contains one so I'll add it.
Oh, I see, I hesitated about if need introduce a unit test when i fix this issue. Seems this is a rule about which case need a new test, isn't it? :)
ACK to the code. I'll rewrite the commit message and add a test case.
Thanks a lot for your quick review and help.
Peter
Luyao
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 05:52:01PM +0800, lhuang wrote:
On 05/21/2015 03:46 PM, Peter Krempa wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 13:08:12 +0800, Luyao Huang wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223631
When set a memory device in the xml, <sysinfo> in xml will be lost. Because we forgot restore ctxt->node to the oldnode after parse memory device, this will make the parse function after virDomainMemoryDefParseXML cannot find a node they need when parse a full xml(virDomainDefParseXML). The commit message is really hard to read.
Okay, I will pay more attention about this. Maybe use the exist similar commit message as an example will be a good choice.
Signed-off-by: Luyao Huang <lhuang@redhat.com> --- src/conf/domain_conf.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.c b/src/conf/domain_conf.c index bfdc94e..7ddc1ea 100644 --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.c +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.c @@ -11828,6 +11828,7 @@ virDomainMemoryDefParseXML(xmlNodePtr memdevNode, if (virDomainDeviceInfoParseXML(memdevNode, NULL, &def->info, flags) < 0) goto error; + ctxt->node = save; return def; A test case is missing. The bugzilla link contains one so I'll add it.
Oh, I see, I hesitated about if need introduce a unit test when i fix this issue. Seems this is a rule about which case need a new test, isn't it? :)
Our rule is that any addition to the XML parser needs to have a test case added - especially true if the addition is fixing a parsing bug :-) Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
On 05/21/2015 06:14 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 05:52:01PM +0800, lhuang wrote:
On 05/21/2015 03:46 PM, Peter Krempa wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 13:08:12 +0800, Luyao Huang wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223631
When set a memory device in the xml, <sysinfo> in xml will be lost. Because we forgot restore ctxt->node to the oldnode after parse memory device, this will make the parse function after virDomainMemoryDefParseXML cannot find a node they need when parse a full xml(virDomainDefParseXML). The commit message is really hard to read. Okay, I will pay more attention about this. Maybe use the exist similar commit message as an example will be a good choice.
Signed-off-by: Luyao Huang <lhuang@redhat.com> --- src/conf/domain_conf.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.c b/src/conf/domain_conf.c index bfdc94e..7ddc1ea 100644 --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.c +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.c @@ -11828,6 +11828,7 @@ virDomainMemoryDefParseXML(xmlNodePtr memdevNode, if (virDomainDeviceInfoParseXML(memdevNode, NULL, &def->info, flags) < 0) goto error; + ctxt->node = save; return def; A test case is missing. The bugzilla link contains one so I'll add it. Oh, I see, I hesitated about if need introduce a unit test when i fix this issue. Seems this is a rule about which case need a new test, isn't it? :) Our rule is that any addition to the XML parser needs to have a test case added - especially true if the addition is fixing a parsing bug :-)
Oh, get it, i will record it to some place as i have a bad memory :) , thank you Daniel
Regards, Daniel
Luyao
participants (4)
-
Daniel P. Berrange -
lhuang -
Luyao Huang
-
Peter Krempa