[v2,6/6] monitor: convert do_cpu_set() to QObject, QError

Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
---
 monitor.c       |    4 ++--
 qemu-monitor.hx |    3 ++-
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

On 01/20/2010 06:07 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster<armbru@redhat.com>
> ---
>   monitor.c       |    4 ++--
>   qemu-monitor.hx |    3 ++-
>   2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/monitor.c b/monitor.c
> index 816f6fd..b9166c3 100644
> --- a/monitor.c
> +++ b/monitor.c
> @@ -808,11 +808,11 @@ static void do_info_cpus(Monitor *mon, QObject **ret_data)
>       *ret_data = QOBJECT(cpu_list);
>   }
>
> -static void do_cpu_set(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict)
> +static void do_cpu_set(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict, QObject **ret_data)
>   {
>       int index = qdict_get_int(qdict, "index");
>       if (mon_set_cpu(index)<  0)
> -        monitor_printf(mon, "Invalid CPU index\n");
> +        qemu_error_new(QERR_INVALID_CPU_INDEX);
>    

Just out of curiousity, why introduce a new error verses using 
(QERR_INVALID_PARAMETER, "index")?

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> writes:

> On 01/20/2010 06:07 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster<armbru@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>   monitor.c       |    4 ++--
>>   qemu-monitor.hx |    3 ++-
>>   2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/monitor.c b/monitor.c
>> index 816f6fd..b9166c3 100644
>> --- a/monitor.c
>> +++ b/monitor.c
>> @@ -808,11 +808,11 @@ static void do_info_cpus(Monitor *mon, QObject **ret_data)
>>       *ret_data = QOBJECT(cpu_list);
>>   }
>>
>> -static void do_cpu_set(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict)
>> +static void do_cpu_set(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict, QObject **ret_data)
>>   {
>>       int index = qdict_get_int(qdict, "index");
>>       if (mon_set_cpu(index)<  0)
>> -        monitor_printf(mon, "Invalid CPU index\n");
>> +        qemu_error_new(QERR_INVALID_CPU_INDEX);
>>    
>
> Just out of curiousity, why introduce a new error verses using
> (QERR_INVALID_PARAMETER, "index")?

To avoid changing the non-QMP monitor.  If you don't care about that, I
can revert 5/6 and update 6/6.

Alternatively, here's a trick to reduce the number of client visible QMP
errors while still keeping the old diagnostic on the non-QMP monitor:

    +#define QERR_INVALID_CPU_INDEX \
    +    "{ 'class': 'InvalidParameter, 'data': { 'name': 'index' } }"
    +
     #define QERR_INVALID_PARAMETER \
         "{ 'class': 'InvalidParameter', 'data': { 'name': %s } }"

On 01/27/2010 02:00 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Anthony Liguori<anthony@codemonkey.ws>  writes:
>
>    
>> On 01/20/2010 06:07 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>      
>>> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster<armbru@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>>    monitor.c       |    4 ++--
>>>    qemu-monitor.hx |    3 ++-
>>>    2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/monitor.c b/monitor.c
>>> index 816f6fd..b9166c3 100644
>>> --- a/monitor.c
>>> +++ b/monitor.c
>>> @@ -808,11 +808,11 @@ static void do_info_cpus(Monitor *mon, QObject **ret_data)
>>>        *ret_data = QOBJECT(cpu_list);
>>>    }
>>>
>>> -static void do_cpu_set(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict)
>>> +static void do_cpu_set(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict, QObject **ret_data)
>>>    {
>>>        int index = qdict_get_int(qdict, "index");
>>>        if (mon_set_cpu(index)<   0)
>>> -        monitor_printf(mon, "Invalid CPU index\n");
>>> +        qemu_error_new(QERR_INVALID_CPU_INDEX);
>>>
>>>        
>> Just out of curiousity, why introduce a new error verses using
>> (QERR_INVALID_PARAMETER, "index")?
>>      
> To avoid changing the non-QMP monitor.  If you don't care about that, I
> can revert 5/6 and update 6/6.
>    

Yes, I don't mind changing error messages in the human monitor.

> Alternatively, here's a trick to reduce the number of client visible QMP
> errors while still keeping the old diagnostic on the non-QMP monitor:
>
>      +#define QERR_INVALID_CPU_INDEX \
>      +    "{ 'class': 'InvalidParameter, 'data': { 'name': 'index' } }"
>      +
>       #define QERR_INVALID_PARAMETER \
>           "{ 'class': 'InvalidParameter', 'data': { 'name': %s } }"
>    

Not a bad idea if you think it's important.  I don't think it is 
though.  I think the chances of anyone relying on specific error 
messages on the monitor is very, very low.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori