Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1 of 1 v5] libxl: introduce LIBXL_DOMAIN_TYPE_INVALID

[Dario Faggioli <raistlin@xxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 11:56 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 11:47 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Dario Faggioli writes ("[PATCH 1 of 1 v5] libxl: introduce 
> > LIBXL_DOMAIN_TYPE_INVALID"):
> > > To avoid recent gcc complaining about:
> > > libxl.c: In function âlibxl_primary_console_execâ:
> > > libxl.c:1233:9: error: case value â4294967295â not in enumerated type 
> > > âlibxl_domain_typeâ [-Werror=switch]
> > ...
> > > +    if (type == LIBXL_DOMAIN_TYPE_INVALID) {
> > > +        LIBXL__LOG(ctx, LIBXL__LOG_ERROR,
> > > +                   "invalid domain type for domain %d", domid);
> > > +        rc = ERROR_INVAL;
> > > +        goto remus_fail;
> > 
> > This is not an expected error condition, is it ?  ERROR_INVAL is for
> > libxl being passed impromper parameters.  So I think this should be
> > ERROR_FAIL.
> 
> Also perhaps the logging should be done in libxl__domain_type? 
>
That makes sense to me...

> Unless
> there are too many legitimate occasions where INVALID might come up?
> 
I might be wrong but I don't think so. There might be some more printing
than with this patch, but mostly before some 'default: abort();'
situation so...

Anyway, I'll do it and try to see how it behaves.

Thanks and Regards,
Dario

-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://retis.sssup.it/people/faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel