From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tools/misc: add xen-wallclock command
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 13:25:10 +0100
Message-ID: <507C00A6.3020001@citrix.com>
References: <1350046970-2591-1-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>	
	<1350046970-2591-3-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>
	<1350293719.18058.13.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1350293719.18058.13.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 15/10/12 10:35, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 14:02 +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
>> +int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>> +{
>> +    const static char sopts[] = "w";
>> +    const static struct option lopts[] = {
>> +        { "help", 0, NULL, 0 },
>> +        { "systowc", 0, NULL, 'w' },
>> +        { 0, 0, NULL, 0 },
>> +    };
>> +    int opt, opt_idx;
>> +
>> +    int systowc = 0;
>> +    xc_interface *xch;
>> +
>> +    exe_name = argv[0];
>> +
>> +    while ( (opt = getopt_long(argc, argv, sopts, lopts, &opt_idx)) != -1 )
>> +    {
>> +        switch ( opt )
>> +        {
>> +        case 'w':
>> +            systowc = 1;
>> +            break;
>> +        case 0:
>> +            switch (opt_idx)
>> +            {
>> +            case 0:
>> +                help();
>> +            }
>> +            break;
>> +        default:
>> +            usage(stderr);
>> +            exit(1);
>> +        }
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    /* Valid combination of options? i.e., --systowc */
>> +    if (!systowc)
>> +    {
>> +        usage(stderr);
>> +        exit(1);
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    xch = xc_interface_open(NULL, NULL, 0);
>> +    if (xch == NULL)
>> +    {
> 
> I forget: Does xc_interface_open log on error?

Yes.

>> +        exit(1);
>> +    }
>> +    xc_wallclock_sync(xch);
> 
> Worth logging if this fails?

Yes.

> I suppose we want to hold off on this and the first patch until the
> Linux side is agreed and committed?

Yes.

>> +    xc_interface_close(xch);
>> +
>> +    return 0;
>> +}

David