On Fri, 7 Jan 2022, Ján Tomko wrote:
> On a Friday in 2022, Ani Sinha wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 7 Jan 2022, Ján Tomko wrote:
> >
> > > On a Friday in 2022, Ani Sinha wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 7 Jan 2022, Michal Prívozník wrote:
> > > > > I don't think so. Just like we've discussed under one patch of yours,
> > > a
> > > > > function should either report error in all cases or none. And in case
> > > of
> > > > > virProcessGetSchedInfo() the linux version does report error
> > > >
> > > > I see your point but there is also a bug in that function - not all
> > > error
> > > > paths report errors. For example, !proc and !lines cases. We need to fix
> > > > that.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I don't see a !proc error path in virProcessGetSchedInfo.
> > >
> >
> > if (tid)
> > proc = g_strdup_printf("/proc/%d/task/%d/sched", (int) pid, (int)
> > tid);
> > else
> > proc = g_strdup_printf("/proc/%d/sched", (int) pid);
> > if (!proc)
> > return -1; <=== not reported
> >
>
> Oh, I did not realize that I had Michal's patch that removes it applied
> locally:
> https://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2022-January/msg00270.html
Ah ok, all makes sense now.
