On 06/06/2012 05:22 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 06/06/2012 09:03 AM, Martin Kletzander wrote:
>> When libvirtd is started and there is an unusable/not-connectable
>> leftover from earlier started machine, it's more reasonable to say
>> that the machine "crashed" if we know it was started with
>> "-no-shutdown".
>> This patch fixes that and also changes the other result (when machine
>> was started without "-no-shutdown") to "unknown", because the previous
>> "failed" reason means (according to include/libvirt/libvirt.h.in:174),
>> that the machine failed to start.
>> ---
>> src/qemu/qemu_process.c | 12 +++++++++++-
>> 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_process.c b/src/qemu/qemu_process.c
>> index 2adf570..604c31b 100644
>> --- a/src/qemu/qemu_process.c
>> +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_process.c
>> @@ -3141,7 +3141,17 @@ error:
>> * to remove danger of it ending up running twice if
>> * user tries to start it again later
>> */
>> - qemuProcessStop(driver, obj, 0, VIR_DOMAIN_SHUTOFF_FAILED);
>> + if (qemuCapsGet(priv->qemuCaps, QEMU_CAPS_NO_SHUTDOWN))
>> + /* If we couldn't get the monitor and qemu supports
>> + * no-shutdown, we can safely say that the domain
>> + * crashed ... */
>> + state = VIR_DOMAIN_SHUTOFF_CRASHED;
>> + else
>
> Style nit - since you have lengthy comments, each branch now occupies
> multiple lines (even if it is only one statement); I would use {} on
> both the if and else branches for that reason.
Fixed ...
>
> ACK.
>
... and pushed, thanks.
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list