OSSTest RFC: ts-xen-build-prep, lvextend1(), don't call lvextend if "-l 0"

OSSTest RFC: ts-xen-build-prep, lvextend1(), don't call lvextend if "-l 0"

[Hu, Robert]

Hi,

lvextend will report error if doing with "-l 0".
So I propose to add an judgment regarding $vg_more_free_pe.

diff --git a/ts-xen-build-prep b/ts-xen-build-prep
index 9a3b523..f1d1255 100755
--- a/ts-xen-build-prep
+++ b/ts-xen-build-prep
@@ -155,7 +155,8 @@ sub lvextend1 ($$$) {
         logm("$what: unstriped $vg_more_free_pe PEs");
         overall_limit_pe(\$vg_more_free_pe);
         $more_pe += $vg_more_free_pe;
-        target_cmd_root($ho, "lvextend -i1 -l +$vg_more_free_pe $lv");
+        target_cmd_root($ho, "lvextend -i1 -l +$vg_more_free_pe $lv") 
+               if $vg_more_free_pe != 0;
     }

Best Regards,
Robert Ho

Re: OSSTest RFC: ts-xen-build-prep, lvextend1(), don't call lvextend if "-l 0"

[Ian Campbell]

On Fri, 2015-08-14 at 03:54 +0000, Hu, Robert wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> lvextend will report error if doing with "-l 0".
> So I propose to add an judgment regarding $vg_more_free_pe.
> 
> diff --git a/ts-xen-build-prep b/ts-xen-build-prep
> index 9a3b523..f1d1255 100755
> --- a/ts-xen-build-prep
> +++ b/ts-xen-build-prep
> @@ -155,7 +155,8 @@ sub lvextend1 ($$$) {
>          logm("$what: unstriped $vg_more_free_pe PEs");
>          overall_limit_pe(\$vg_more_free_pe);
>          $more_pe += $vg_more_free_pe;
> -        target_cmd_root($ho, "lvextend -i1 -l +$vg_more_free_pe $lv");
> +        target_cmd_root($ho, "lvextend -i1 -l +$vg_more_free_pe $lv") 
> +               if $vg_more_free_pe != 0;
>      }

In my tree at least the } is closing a "if ($vg_more_free_pe)". Perhaps
it would make more sense to extend that to also check for ? 0?

if (($vg_more_free_pe//0) > 0)

is probably nicer than
if ($vg_more_free_pe && $vg_more_free_pe > 0)
I suppose.

Or maybe add //0 to the 
    my $vg_more_free_pe= $vginfo[15];

Ian.

Re: OSSTest RFC: ts-xen-build-prep, lvextend1(), don't call lvextend if "-l 0"

[Hu, Robert]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Campbell [mailto:ian.campbell@citrix.com]
> Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 5:05 PM
> To: Hu, Robert; 'Ian Jackson'; 'wei.liu2@citrix.com'
> Cc: 'xen-devel@lists.xen.org'
> Subject: Re: OSSTest RFC: ts-xen-build-prep, lvextend1(), don't call lvextend if
> "-l 0"
> 
> On Fri, 2015-08-14 at 03:54 +0000, Hu, Robert wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > lvextend will report error if doing with "-l 0".
> > So I propose to add an judgment regarding $vg_more_free_pe.
> >
> > diff --git a/ts-xen-build-prep b/ts-xen-build-prep
> > index 9a3b523..f1d1255 100755
> > --- a/ts-xen-build-prep
> > +++ b/ts-xen-build-prep
> > @@ -155,7 +155,8 @@ sub lvextend1 ($$$) {
> >          logm("$what: unstriped $vg_more_free_pe PEs");
> >          overall_limit_pe(\$vg_more_free_pe);
> >          $more_pe += $vg_more_free_pe;
> > -        target_cmd_root($ho, "lvextend -i1 -l +$vg_more_free_pe $lv");
> > +        target_cmd_root($ho, "lvextend -i1 -l +$vg_more_free_pe $lv")
> > +               if $vg_more_free_pe != 0;
> >      }
> 
> In my tree at least the } is closing a "if ($vg_more_free_pe)". Perhaps
> it would make more sense to extend that to also check for ? 0?
I find that $vg_more_free_pe is set to 0 by 'overall_limit_pe(\$vg_more_free_pe);'.
> 
> if (($vg_more_free_pe//0) > 0)
> 
> is probably nicer than
> if ($vg_more_free_pe && $vg_more_free_pe > 0)
> I suppose.
> 
> Or maybe add //0 to the
>     my $vg_more_free_pe= $vginfo[15];
> 
> Ian.