>>> On 22.07.15 at 13:07, <roger....@citrix.com> wrote:
> --- a/xen/common/hvm/save.c
> +++ b/xen/common/hvm/save.c
> @@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ int hvm_save_one(struct domain *d, uint16_t typecode,
> uint16_t instance,
> uint32_t off;
> const struct hvm_save_descriptor *desc;
>
> - rv = -EBADSLT;
> + rv = -EDOM;
> for ( off = 0; off < (ctxt.cur - sizeof(*desc)); off += desc->length
> )
> {
> desc = (void *)(ctxt.data + off);
In what sense do you view EDOM applicable here? It looks pretty
strange to me (also the one further up, but as George says the
precise value there doesn't really matter all that much). ENXIO or
ENOENT would seem more suitable here (and for the one above I'd
rather pick e.g. EACCES, EOPNOTSUPP, or even ENOSYS). I'd be
fine adjusting these on commit, i.e. no need to re-submit (but
please let me know if you have a preference for any of the
suggestions).
In any event, consider the whole series
Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
(or the other two, and with the changes made also this one,
even Reviewed-by).
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
