Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] x86/hvm: Change return error for offline vcpus

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 21.09.18 at 09:30, <aisaila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/save.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/save.c
> @@ -165,7 +165,8 @@ int hvm_save_one(struct domain *d, unsigned int typecode, 
> unsigned int instance,
>      if ( (rv = hvm_sr_handlers[typecode].save(v, &ctxt)) != 0 )
>          printk(XENLOG_G_ERR "HVM%d save: failed to save type %"PRIu16" 
> (%d)\n",
>                 d->domain_id, typecode, rv);
> -    else if ( rv = -ENOENT, ctxt.cur >= sizeof(*desc) )
> +    else if ( rv = hvm_sr_handlers[typecode].kind == HVMSR_PER_VCPU ?
> +              -ENODATA : -ENOENT, ctxt.cur >= sizeof(*desc) )

This very certainly needs parenthesizes, since if asked explicitly I
don't think many people will be able to quickly answer the question
of precedence between the ?: and , operators. I'm happy to add
these while committing, and with them in place
Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel