Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 05:52:03PM +0200, Daniel Veillard wrote:
>> There were a number of places where the object name was not not
>> reported, based on the use I don't think the string could be NULL
>> in any of those. I also fixed a few POOL error which were really
>> VOLume ones.
>
> There's a few places here still using VIR_ERR_INVALID_xxxxx which
> could also be changed to VIR_ERR_NO_xxxx, since the INVALID errors
> codes description is refering to bad pointer addresses.
>
> Aside from that, this looks good.
>
Kind of a tangent, but...
Can we go back to using macros for all this duplicate validation? For
example, the idiom:
if (!vm) {
char uuidstr[VIR_UUID_STRING_BUFLEN];
virUUIDFormat(dom->uuid, uuidstr);
qemudReportError(dom->conn, dom, NULL, VIR_ERR_NO_DOMAIN,
_("no domain with matching uuid '%s'"),
uuidstr);
goto cleanup;
}
Takes up over 200 lines in qemu_driver.c. Sure, having a goto in a macro
seems disgusting, but label names are used consistently so it hopefully
wouldn't cause any problems.
Would there be any objections to reintroducing macros for this stuff?
Can CIL handle macros when doing the lock checking?
- Cole
--
Libvir-list mailing list
Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list