Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] remus: don't do failover if we don't have an consistent state

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>]

On Tue, 2016-01-19 at 15:17 +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
> We will have an consistent state when a CHECKPOINT_END record

"a consistent ..." (and in the subject too).

> is received. After the first CHECKPOINT_END record is received,
> we will buffer all records until the next CHECKPOINT_END record
> is received. So if the checkpoint() callback returns
> XGR_CHECKPOINT_FAILOVER,
> we only can do failover if ctx->restore.buffer_all_records is
> true.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---

Please can you get into the habit of writing a delta from the previous
version here. e.g. in this case:

v5: New patch.

Putting it after the --- means it doesn't go into the actual commit ("git
am" will strip it) but it is very useful for reviewers to know what changed
in each iteration.

See also http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Submitting_Xen_Patches#Review.2C_Rinse_.26_Repeat

>  tools/libxc/xc_sr_restore.c | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/libxc/xc_sr_restore.c b/tools/libxc/xc_sr_restore.c
> index 05159bb..9fe2829 100644
> --- a/tools/libxc/xc_sr_restore.c
> +++ b/tools/libxc/xc_sr_restore.c
> @@ -493,7 +493,11 @@ static int handle_checkpoint(struct xc_sr_context
> *ctx)
>          break;
>  
>      case XGR_CHECKPOINT_FAILOVER:
> -        rc = BROKEN_CHANNEL;
> +        if ( ctx->restore.buffer_all_records )
> +            rc = BROKEN_CHANNEL;
> +        else
> +            /* We don't have an consistent state */

"a" not "an" again.

I can s/an/a/ in all 3 places upon commit, so no need to resend for just
those.

Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>

I'll give Andy a chance to comment before committing though.

> +            rc = -1;
>          goto err;
>  
>      default: /* Other fatal error */

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel