[libvirt] [PATCH] qemu: process: Use enum belonging to correct type
GCC was unhappy about comparison between two distinct enum types. Use the correct value instead. Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa <pkrempa@redhat.com> --- Pushed as a build fix. src/qemu/qemu_process.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_process.c b/src/qemu/qemu_process.c index afa960a683..855bd9cb14 100644 --- a/src/qemu/qemu_process.c +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_process.c @@ -7835,7 +7835,7 @@ qemuProcessRefreshLegacyBlockjob(void *payload, return 0; } - if (jobtype == VIR_DOMAIN_BLOCK_JOB_TYPE_COMMIT && + if (jobtype == QEMU_BLOCKJOB_TYPE_COMMIT && disk->mirrorJob == VIR_DOMAIN_BLOCK_JOB_TYPE_ACTIVE_COMMIT) jobtype = disk->mirrorJob; -- 2.20.1
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 08:44:02AM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote:
GCC was unhappy about comparison between two distinct enum types. Use the correct value instead.
It is nice to see that GCC is actually intelligent enough to catch this kind of mistake these days !
Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa <pkrempa@redhat.com> ---
Pushed as a build fix.
src/qemu/qemu_process.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_process.c b/src/qemu/qemu_process.c index afa960a683..855bd9cb14 100644 --- a/src/qemu/qemu_process.c +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_process.c @@ -7835,7 +7835,7 @@ qemuProcessRefreshLegacyBlockjob(void *payload, return 0; }
- if (jobtype == VIR_DOMAIN_BLOCK_JOB_TYPE_COMMIT && + if (jobtype == QEMU_BLOCKJOB_TYPE_COMMIT && disk->mirrorJob == VIR_DOMAIN_BLOCK_JOB_TYPE_ACTIVE_COMMIT) jobtype = disk->mirrorJob;
-- 2.20.1
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 09:57:19 +0000, Daniel Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 08:44:02AM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote:
GCC was unhappy about comparison between two distinct enum types. Use the correct value instead.
It is nice to see that GCC is actually intelligent enough to catch this kind of mistake these days !
Yes, I'm surprised as well. It's actually ironic since I started using clang just for this series as it was also finding some problems noted by Jano. Now I've configured vpath for both compilers, just to be sure.
participants (2)
-
Daniel P. Berrangé -
Peter Krempa