On Thu, 2016-05-26 at 09:51 -0400, Laine Stump wrote:
> On 05/23/2016 12:00 PM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> >
> > Commit ff2126225df0 changed the error message to be more
> > detailed about the failure at hand; however, while the new
> > error message claims that "bus must be <= index", the error
> > message is displayed if "idx <= addr->bus", ie. when bus
> > is bigger than or *equal to* index.
> >
> > Change the error message to report the correct constraint,
> > and format it in a way that mirrors the check exactly to
> > make it clearer to people reading the code. The new error
> > message reads "must be index > bus".
> > ---
> > I'm assuming the code, which is pre-existing, is correct
> > here. CC'ing Laine for insights.
> >
> > src/qemu/qemu_domain_address.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_domain_address.c b/src/qemu/qemu_domain_address.c
> > index 7bd8ee5..650cb2a 100644
> > --- a/src/qemu/qemu_domain_address.c
> > +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_domain_address.c
> > @@ -1598,14 +1598,14 @@ qemuDomainAssignPCIAddresses(virDomainDefPtr def,
> > break;
> > }
> >
> > - /* check if every PCI bridge controller's ID is greater than
> > + /* check if every PCI bridge controller's index is greater than
> > * the bus it is placed onto
> > */
> > if (cont->model == VIR_DOMAIN_CONTROLLER_MODEL_PCI_BRIDGE &&
> > idx <= addr->bus) {
> > virReportError(VIR_ERR_CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED,
> > _("PCI controller at index %d (0x%02x) has "
> > - "bus='0x%02x', but bus must be <= index"),
> > + "bus='0x%02x'; must be index > bus"),
>
> ACK, but instead of re-ordering it into something that doesn't sound
> like a natural sentence, you could use "larger than" instead of ">", and
> word it like this:
>
> PCI controller at index %d (0x%02x) has bus='0x%02x', but
> index must be larger than bus
>
> Either way it's going to get the idea across though :-)
I changed the error message according to your suggestion
and pushed it.
> Also, a BZ was actually filed about this :-O, so I suppose you should
> reference the BZ number (1339900)
Ján had found that BZ and, seeing as I had already proposed
a fix, assigned it to me just this morning :)
--
Andrea Bolognani
Software Engineer - Virtualization Team
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list