9:42 a.m.
---
Building with ENABLE_DEBUG=0 showed more errors,
because VIR_DEBUG() get replaced with dummy 'do {} while(0)' statement,
and compiler complains about unused parameters. So if anybody knows
how to get rid of this ... Note that I am speaking about '...' part in
VIR_DEBUG_INT() definition.
src/util/command.c | 9 +++------
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/util/command.c b/src/util/command.c
index ebb90cb..4b8a940 100644
--- a/src/util/command.c
+++ b/src/util/command.c
@@ -962,9 +962,8 @@ virCommandProcessIO(virCommandPtr cmd)
} else {
inoff += done;
if (inoff == inlen) {
- int tmpfd = infd;
if (VIR_CLOSE(infd) < 0)
- VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d",
tmpfd);
+ VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", infd);
}
}
}
@@ -1145,17 +1144,15 @@ virCommandRun(virCommandPtr cmd, int *exitstatus)
VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", tmpfd);
}
if (cmd->outbuf == &outbuf) {
- int tmpfd = cmd->outfd;
if (VIR_CLOSE(cmd->outfd) < 0)
- VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", tmpfd);
+ VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", cmd->outfd);
cmd->outfdptr = NULL;
cmd->outbuf = NULL;
VIR_FREE(outbuf);
}
if (cmd->errbuf == &errbuf) {
- int tmpfd = cmd->errfd;
if (VIR_CLOSE(cmd->errfd) < 0)
- VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", tmpfd);
+ VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", cmd->errfd);
cmd->errfdptr = NULL;
cmd->errbuf = NULL;
VIR_FREE(errbuf);
--
1.7.5.rc3
10 a.m.
On 22.05.2011 16:42, Michal Privoznik wrote:
---
Building with ENABLE_DEBUG=0 showed more errors,
because VIR_DEBUG() get replaced with dummy 'do {} while(0)' statement,
and compiler complains about unused parameters. So if anybody knows
how to get rid of this ... Note that I am speaking about '...' part in
VIR_DEBUG_INT() definition.
src/util/command.c | 9 +++------
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/util/command.c b/src/util/command.c
index ebb90cb..4b8a940 100644
--- a/src/util/command.c
+++ b/src/util/command.c
@@ -962,9 +962,8 @@ virCommandProcessIO(virCommandPtr cmd)
} else {
inoff += done;
if (inoff == inlen) {
- int tmpfd = infd;
if (VIR_CLOSE(infd) < 0)
- VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d",
tmpfd);
+ VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d",
infd);
}
}
}
@@ -1145,17 +1144,15 @@ virCommandRun(virCommandPtr cmd, int *exitstatus)
VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", tmpfd);
}
if (cmd->outbuf == &outbuf) {
- int tmpfd = cmd->outfd;
if (VIR_CLOSE(cmd->outfd) < 0)
- VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", tmpfd);
+ VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", cmd->outfd);
cmd->outfdptr = NULL;
cmd->outbuf = NULL;
VIR_FREE(outbuf);
}
if (cmd->errbuf == &errbuf) {
- int tmpfd = cmd->errfd;
if (VIR_CLOSE(cmd->errfd) < 0)
- VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", tmpfd);
+ VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", cmd->errfd);
cmd->errfdptr = NULL;
cmd->errbuf = NULL;
VIR_FREE(errbuf);
NACK. I misunderstood the concept of VIR_CLOSE. But the problem written
above persists.
Michal
2:04 p.m.
On 05/22/2011 09:00 AM, Michal Prívozník wrote:
On 22.05.2011 16:42, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> ---
> Building with ENABLE_DEBUG=0 showed more errors,
> because VIR_DEBUG() get replaced with dummy 'do {} while(0)' statement,
> and compiler complains about unused parameters. So if anybody knows
> how to get rid of this ... Note that I am speaking about '...' part in
> VIR_DEBUG_INT() definition.
> if (inoff == inlen) {
> - int tmpfd = infd;
> if (VIR_CLOSE(infd) < 0)
> - VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d",
tmpfd);
> + VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d",
infd);
That won't work (infd is -1 at this point, not the value you meant to
print). Either we don't care about the failure (and VIR_FORCE_CLOSE is
the better fix), or we do care about it, and should be using something
stronger than a VIR_DEBUG that can be compiled out.
Using VIR_FORCE_CLOSE is probably the right fix for this immediate
issue; another option would be marking the variable as (potentially)
unused, as in:
int tmpfd ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED;
tmpfd = infd;
But I can't help but wonder if the more generic issue could be solved by
making VIR_DEBUG() (when ENABLE_DEBUG=0) actually call a static inline
no-op varargs function, so that gcc treats it as using its arguments,
rather than the current situation of expanding to nothing and leaving
variables unused.
--
Eric Blake eblake(a)redhat.com +1-801-349-2682
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
6:47 a.m.
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 04:42:09PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
---
Building with ENABLE_DEBUG=0 showed more errors,
because VIR_DEBUG() get replaced with dummy 'do {} while(0)' statement,
and compiler complains about unused parameters. So if anybody knows
how to get rid of this ... Note that I am speaking about '...' part in
VIR_DEBUG_INT() definition.
src/util/command.c | 9 +++------
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/util/command.c b/src/util/command.c
index ebb90cb..4b8a940 100644
--- a/src/util/command.c
+++ b/src/util/command.c
@@ -962,9 +962,8 @@ virCommandProcessIO(virCommandPtr cmd)
} else {
inoff += done;
if (inoff == inlen) {
- int tmpfd = infd;
if (VIR_CLOSE(infd) < 0)
- VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d",
tmpfd);
+ VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d",
infd);
}
}
}
@@ -1145,17 +1144,15 @@ virCommandRun(virCommandPtr cmd, int *exitstatus)
VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", tmpfd);
}
if (cmd->outbuf == &outbuf) {
- int tmpfd = cmd->outfd;
if (VIR_CLOSE(cmd->outfd) < 0)
- VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", tmpfd);
+ VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", cmd->outfd);
cmd->outfdptr = NULL;
cmd->outbuf = NULL;
VIR_FREE(outbuf);
}
if (cmd->errbuf == &errbuf) {
- int tmpfd = cmd->errfd;
if (VIR_CLOSE(cmd->errfd) < 0)
- VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", tmpfd);
+ VIR_DEBUG("ignoring failed close on fd %d", cmd->errfd);
cmd->errfdptr = NULL;
cmd->errbuf = NULL;
VIR_FREE(errbuf);
Anything which wants to ignore the return status of VIR_CLOSE and not
report an error, should be using VIR_FORCE_CLOSE instead.
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 :|
4933
days inactive
4934
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Daniel P. Berrange -
Eric Blake -
Michal Privoznik -
Michal Prívozník