On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:22:47 +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
> It is not a fatal error if some monitor command is not supported.
> So we should not return -1 when human-monitor-command is not supported.
> Set reply_str to "unknown command: 'human-monitor-command'", and the caller
> can deal this error the same as the command that we want to run by
> human-monitor-command.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang <wency@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ---
> src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c b/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c
> index 13d12c8..7ec4ce7 100644
> --- a/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c
> +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c
> @@ -694,6 +694,16 @@ qemuMonitorJSONHumanCommandWithFd(qemuMonitorPtr mon,
> if (!cmd || qemuMonitorJSONCommandWithFd(mon, cmd, scm_fd, &reply) < 0)
> goto cleanup;
>
> + if (qemuMonitorJSONHasError(reply, "CommandNotFound")) {
> + *reply_str = strdup("unknown command: 'human-monitor-command'");
> + if (!*reply_str) {
> + virReportOOMError();
> + goto cleanup;
> + }
> + ret = 0;
> + goto cleanup;
> + }
> +
> if (qemuMonitorJSONCheckError(cmd, reply))
> goto cleanup;
>
I'm not convinced this is a good idea. In case the caller (from
qemu_monitor_text.c) decides to ignore the error and return success, the
original caller from qemu_monitor_json.c will get confused since it will think
the operation succeeded. I think the json method should really fail in case it
tries to use HMP passthrough which is not supported. In a short while I'll
submit a patch that makes it possible to detect availability of
human-monitor-command so that each json method can decide what to do if HMP
passthrough is not supported.
Jirka
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list