Hi Daniel, On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 06:02:20PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Sat, Sep 06, 2025 at 03:09:00PM +0200, Andrea Righi wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <[email protected]> > > --- > > src/qemu/qemu_command.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+) > > Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <[email protected]> > > > > > diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_command.c b/src/qemu/qemu_command.c > > index 3f9b583985..9ca0847789 100644 > > --- a/src/qemu/qemu_command.c > > +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_command.c > > @@ -5222,6 +5222,47 @@ qemuBuildHostdevSCSICommandLine(virCommand *cmd, > > } > > > > > > +static int > > +qemuBuildAcpiNodesetProps(virCommand *cmd, > > + virDomainDeviceInfo *info, > > + virQEMUCaps *qemuCaps) > > +{ > > + static unsigned int giIndex; > > + int node = -1; > > + > > + if (!info->acpiNodeset) > > + return 0; > > + > > + if (!virQEMUCapsGet(qemuCaps, QEMU_CAPS_ACPI_GENERIC_INITIATOR)) > > + return -1; > > We can assume the validate function already ran, so we don't > need this check here, which is good as this would return an > error status without setting an error message.
Ah yes, this check is redundant, we can definitely drop it. Should I send an update patch just with this change? Thanks, -Andrea
