Re: [Xen-devel] xl: improve return codes for more xl comands

[George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Paulina Szubarczyk
<paulinaszubarczyk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This regards bite-size task for Outreachy program [0].
>
> I followed the patches prepared by Harmandeep [1] where functions in
> xl_cmdimpl.c have the pattern:
>
> "*main_foo() is treated somewhat as a regular main(), it is changed to
> return EXIT_SUCCESS or EXIT_FAILURE.
>
> *Functions that are not main_foo(), are changed to do 'return 0' or
> 'return 1', and then 0/1 is taken care in the main_foo() functions
> that calls them. "
>
> The changes regard scheduling functions.
>
> But in the preliminary patches [2] there is a notion to change not
> main_foo()
> to return EXIT_SUCCESS or EXIT_FAILURE, like in [3].
>
> Should not-main functions related to
> - mem-set
> - cd-insert
> - pci-*
> return 0/1 or should EXIT_SUCCESS/EXIT_FAILURE be kept?
>
> There is also a patch that change exit code from numeric values or ERROR_*
> codes to be either EXIT_SUCCESS or EXIT_FAILURE for migrate related
> functions [4].
>
> Could that be applied to those functions too?

Yes, it looks like Harmandeep's series had more scrutiny and more
careful thought, so please follow the pattern she set. :-)

 -George

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