[libvirt PATCH] drivers: Group global feature together

[Ján Tomko]

On a Thursday in 2022, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 09:26:21PM +0100, Ján Tomko wrote:
>> >     switch ((virDrvFeature) feature) {
>> > +        case VIR_DRV_FEATURE_REMOTE:
>> > +        case VIR_DRV_FEATURE_PROGRAM_KEEPALIVE:
>> > +        case VIR_DRV_FEATURE_REMOTE_CLOSE_CALLBACK:
>> > +        case VIR_DRV_FEATURE_REMOTE_EVENT_CALLBACK:
>> >         case VIR_DRV_FEATURE_TYPED_PARAM_STRING:
>> >         case VIR_DRV_FEATURE_NETWORK_UPDATE_HAS_CORRECT_ORDER:
>> > -            return 1;
>> > +        case VIR_DRV_FEATURE_FD_PASSING:
>> > +            /* Should have already been handled by virDriverFeatureIsGlobal() */
>> > +            return -1;
>>
>> Here you return an error without reporting an error.
>>
>> Would virReportEnumRangeError be reasonable to use here?
>
>Mh. While the error message ("Unexpected enum value N for virFoo") is
>not too specific about this, virReportEnumRangeError() is usually
>called when the provided value cannot be translated back to one of
>the enum values; in this case it *can* be converted, it's just not
>supposed to be encountered in the specific situation. Given the
>subtly different semantics, I'm leaning towards not using that
>helper.
>
>Would something like
>
>  virReportError(VIR_ERR_CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED,
>                 _("Global feature %d should have already been handled"),
>                 feature);
>
>work for you? I'd drop the comment of course.
>

Reviewed-by: Ján Tomko <jtomko at redhat.com>

Jano
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/attachments/20220407/163d41be/attachment.sig>