From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41747)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <morita.kazutaka@gmail.com>) id 1UVJ1v-0001tV-HV
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 06:04:00 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <morita.kazutaka@gmail.com>) id 1UVJ1r-00064c-0L
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 06:03:55 -0400
Received: from mail-pd0-f176.google.com ([209.85.192.176]:46203)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <morita.kazutaka@gmail.com>) id 1UVJ1q-00064W-QM
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 06:03:50 -0400
Received: by mail-pd0-f176.google.com with SMTP id r11so1703841pdi.7
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 03:03:49 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 19:03:45 +0900
Message-ID: <m2r4hz2agu.wl%morita.kazutaka@gmail.com>
From: MORITA Kazutaka <morita.kazutaka@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5178FB09.9010608@gmail.com>
References: <1366822079-6582-1-git-send-email-namei.unix@gmail.com>
	<1366879354-5120-1-git-send-email-namei.unix@gmail.com>
	<m2sj2f2biw.wl%morita.kazutaka@gmail.com>
	<5178FB09.9010608@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [sheepdog] [PATCH v3] sheepdog: fix loadvm
	operation
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Liu Yuan <namei.unix@gmail.com>
Cc: MORITA Kazutaka <morita.kazutaka@gmail.com>, Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, sheepdog@lists.wpkg.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>

At Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:44:41 +0800,
Liu Yuan wrote:
> 
> On 04/25/2013 05:40 PM, MORITA Kazutaka wrote:
> > Isn't it better to show an error message when the result code is
> > SD_RES_NO_VDI?
> 
> This information isn't useful even for debugging, what it for?

The block driver tries to delete the vdi, but the sheepdog servers
return "No such vdi" - I thought that something goes wrong in this
case.

What's the scenario where the sheepdog servers return SD_RES_NO_VDI?
Can we ignore it safely?

Thanks,

Kazutaka