Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 22/29] libxl: Introduce DOMAIN_DESTROYED error code

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2015-03-31 at 19:47 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 22/29] libxl: Introduce 
> DOMAIN_DESTROYED error code"):
> > Konrad has a semantically similar error code which he is adding, I think
> > in his recent libxl series to do with vcpu-set.
> 
> That is valuable, I think.
> 
> > AIUI Konrad's semantics are simply "domain does not exist", which seems
> > to be usefully distinct from your "did exist but doesn't any more".
> 
> Indeed, although it's not clear to me without peering at the code in
> detail whether my code always checks that the domain does exist before
> setting up the watch which might result in its death being reported.
> 
> > I just wanted to mention it in case I'd misunderstood one or both error
> > codes. As it stands this patch seems fine to me:
> ...
> > Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> > I do wonder though if we ought to be better about documenting in the
> > code|headers|idl what error codes mean and where they should be used
> > (some are global, others specific to a subset of calls etc).
> 
> That would definitely be nice.  Do you think it would be helpful to
> respin this patch with that information ?

If you can be bothered, sure. I suppose we ought to start somewhere!

Ian.


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