Am 03.06.2016 um 20:20 hat cl...@redhat.com geschrieben:
> From: Colin Lord <cl...@redhat.com>
>
> Returns negative error codes and accompanying error messages in cases where
> the device has no tray or the tray is locked and isn't forced open. This
> extra information should result in better flexibility in functions that
> call do_open_tray.
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Lord <cl...@redhat.com>
Strictly speaking not a fix, but just a cleanup, right? Maybe change
that in the subject line.
> @@ -2348,8 +2345,8 @@ static int do_open_tray(const char *device, bool force,
> Error **errp)
> }
>
> if (!blk_dev_has_tray(blk)) {
> - /* Ignore this command on tray-less devices */
> - return ENOSYS;
> + error_setg(errp, "Device '%s' does not have a tray", device);
> + return -ENOSYS;
> }
>
> if (blk_dev_is_tray_open(blk)) {
> @@ -2366,7 +2363,9 @@ static int do_open_tray(const char *device, bool force,
> Error **errp)
> }
>
> if (locked && !force) {
> - return EINPROGRESS;
> + error_setg(errp, "Device '%s' is locked and force was not specified,
> "
> + "wait for tray to open and try again", device);
> + return -EINPROGRESS;
> }
>
> return 0;
You're changing the return values here (which is fine), but we need to
update the function comment as well. It still says:
* May return +ENOSYS if the device has no tray,
* or +EINPROGRESS if the tray is locked and the guest has been notified.
> @@ -2375,10 +2374,18 @@ static int do_open_tray(const char *device, bool
> force, Error **errp)
> void qmp_blockdev_open_tray(const char *device, bool has_force, bool force,
> Error **errp)
> {
> + Error *local_err = NULL;
> + int rc;
> +
> if (!has_force) {
> force = false;
> }
> - do_open_tray(device, force, errp);
> + rc = do_open_tray(device, force, &local_err);
> + if (local_err && (rc == -EINPROGRESS || rc == -ENOSYS)) {
rc < 0 already implies that local_err is set, so while that check
doesn't hurt, technically it's redundant.
> + error_free(local_err);
> + } else {
> + error_propagate(errp, local_err);
> + }
> }
Kevin
