Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xl: Suppress spurious warning message for cpupool-list

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2012-11-20 at 16:03 +0000, George Dunlap wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Ian Campbell
> <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>         > This patch adds a "probe" argument to cpupool_info(). If
>         set, it won't print
>         > a warning if the xc_cpupool_getinfo() fails with ENOENT.
>         
>         
>         Looking at the callers I think the existing "exact" parameter
>         could be
>         used instead of a new param -- it would be fine to fail
>         silently on
>         ENOENT iff !exact, I think.
> 
> Hmm -- those two don't seem to me to necessarily mean the same thing;
> it's not clear to me that "exact==true" would imply "print an error
> message" and "exact==false" would imply "don't print an error
> message".

I think my logic was: If I asked for an exact thing and didn't get it
then that is worth logging. But if I didn't ask for something exact then
it doesn't really matter if it can't be found so no point in logging. If
you see what I mean.

> 
> But at the moment the two callers of the function pass (true,false)
> and (false,true) for those booleans, and it is an internal function,
> so if it turns out we need to make a distinction we can always add the
> extra parameter in later.
> 
> New patch on the way...
> 
>  -George
> 



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