On 2018-08-24 00:08, John Snow wrote: > Presently we codify the entry point for a job as the "start" callback, > but a more apt name would be "run" to clarify the idea that when this > function returns we consider the job to have "finished," except for > any cleanup which occurs in separate callbacks later. > > As part of this clarification, change the signature to include an error > object and a return code. The error ptr is not yet used, and the return > code while captured, will be overwritten by actions in the job_completed > function. > > Signed-off-by: John Snow <js...@redhat.com> > --- > block/backup.c | 7 ++++--- > block/commit.c | 7 ++++--- > block/create.c | 8 +++++--- > block/mirror.c | 10 ++++++---- > block/stream.c | 7 ++++--- > include/qemu/job.h | 2 +- > job.c | 6 +++--- > tests/test-bdrv-drain.c | 7 ++++--- > tests/test-blockjob-txn.c | 16 ++++++++-------- > tests/test-blockjob.c | 7 ++++--- > 10 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mre...@redhat.com> But I see a discrepancy in the upcoming s->ret <=> s->err relationship now. And that is if .run() doesn't return an Error *... That could be remedied immediately in job_co_entry(), though, either by calling job_update_rc(), or by inlining its "if (!job->err)" part. Max
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
