On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 10:45 AM Michal Prívozník <mprivozn@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 6/6/21 12:15 PM, Fabiano Fidêncio wrote:
> > Currently `virt-host-validate` will fail whenever one of its calls fail,
> > regardless of virHostValidateLevel set.
> >
> > This behaviour is not optimal and makes it not exactly reliable as a
> > command line tool as other tools or scripts using it would have to check
> > its output to figure out whether something really failed or if a warning
> > was mistakenly treated as failure.
> >
> > With this change, the behaviour of whether to fail or not, is defined by
> > the caller of those functions, based on the virHostValidateLevel passed
> > to them.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Fabiano Fidêncio <fabiano@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > tools/virt-host-validate-common.c | 129 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> > 1 file changed, 94 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/virt-host-validate-common.c b/tools/virt-host-validate-common.c
> > index 6dd851f07d..2bf97bad75 100644
> > --- a/tools/virt-host-validate-common.c
> > +++ b/tools/virt-host-validate-common.c
> > @@ -138,15 +138,21 @@ int virHostValidateDeviceExists(const char *hvname,
> > virHostValidateLevel level,
> > const char *hint)
> > {
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > virHostMsgCheck(hvname, "if device %s exists", dev_name);
> >
> > if (access(dev_name, F_OK) < 0) {
> > virHostMsgFail(level, "%s", hint);
> > - return -1;
> > + if (level == VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_FAIL)
> > + ret = -1;
> > + goto out;
> > }
> >
> > virHostMsgPass();
> > - return 0;
> > +
> > + out:
> > + return ret;
> > }
> >
> >
>
> The patch, or idea it implements is correct. However, I think a lot of
> these 'out' labels can be dropped and 'goto out' can be replaced with
> 'return -1' or 'return 0'. Does that work for you?
Sure, I'll submit a v2 later Today addressing those.
Thanks a whole lot for the timely review!
Best Regards,
--
Fabiano Fidêncio
