On 06/05/2017 03:39 AM, Peter Krempa wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 06:17:17 -0400, John Ferlan wrote:
>> If virObjectIsClass fails "internally" to virobject.c, create a macro to
>> generate the VIR_WARN describing what the problem is. Also improve the
>> checks and message a bit to indicate which was the failure - whether the
>> obj was NULL or just not the right class
>>
>> Signed-off-by: John Ferlan <jferlan@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> src/util/virobject.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/util/virobject.c b/src/util/virobject.c
>> index 34805d3..9f5f187 100644
>> --- a/src/util/virobject.c
>> +++ b/src/util/virobject.c
>> @@ -47,6 +47,16 @@ struct _virClass {
>> virObjectDisposeCallback dispose;
>> };
>>
>> +#define VIR_OBJECT_USAGE_PRINT_WARNING(anyobj, objclass) \
>> + do { \
>> + virObjectPtr obj = anyobj; \
>> + if (!obj) \
>> + VIR_WARN("Object %p is not a virObject class instance", anyobj);\
>
> Is this really helpful?
>
> Object (nil) is not a virObject class instance.
>
> %p does not make sense since it's always NULL, and also obviously a
> null pointer is not a class instance ...
>
True; however, if you had snipped more context:
- VIR_WARN("Object %p (%s) is not a virObjectLockable instance",
- anyobj, obj ? obj->klass->name : "(unknown)");
the old context used the "? ... :" and would also have said "Object
(nil) (unknown) is not... " - I just went more direct and removed the
assumption that it's a virObjectLockable instance. I can change the
message if that's all you object to though.
The goal here was the second half of the message to be more explicit.
John
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
