On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 04:02:05PM +0100, Martin Wilck wrote: > multi-target maps are more like maps with a single non-multipath > target than like maps with no target at all. > > Signed-off-by: Martin Wilck <mwilck@xxxxxxxx> > --- > libmultipath/devmapper.c | 2 +- > tests/mapinfo.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/libmultipath/devmapper.c b/libmultipath/devmapper.c > index 52bfe9c..ab6eefc 100644 > --- a/libmultipath/devmapper.c > +++ b/libmultipath/devmapper.c > @@ -719,7 +719,7 @@ static int libmp_mapinfo__(int flags, mapid_t id, mapinfo_t info, const char *ma > if (dm_get_next_target(dmt, NULL, &start, &length, > &target_type, ¶ms) != NULL) { > condlog(2, "%s: map %s has multiple targets", fname__, map_id); > - return DMP_NOT_FOUND; > + return DMP_NO_MATCH; > } > if (!params) { > condlog(2, "%s: map %s has no targets", fname__, map_id); I feel like given the choice between DMP_NOT_FOUND and DMP_NO_MATCH, an empty table should be DMP_NO_MATCH since we did find a device. I assume you left this case alone because it will get changed with the addition of a new error code for empty tables (I plan on posting that shortly). So Reviewed-by: Benjamin Marzinski <bmarzins@xxxxxxxxxx> > diff --git a/tests/mapinfo.c b/tests/mapinfo.c > index fca6462..66c81e8 100644 > --- a/tests/mapinfo.c > +++ b/tests/mapinfo.c > @@ -870,7 +870,7 @@ static void test_mapinfo_bad_next_target_01(void **state) > rc = libmp_mapinfo(DM_MAP_BY_NAME, > (mapid_t) { .str = "foo", }, > (mapinfo_t) { .size = &size }); > - assert_int_equal(rc, DMP_NOT_FOUND); > + assert_int_equal(rc, DMP_NO_MATCH); > } > > static void test_mapinfo_bad_next_target_02(void **state) > -- > 2.47.0