Pretty long patch summary line. Do we not try to limit that? On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:40:58PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > When using following CLI: > -numa dist,src=128,dst=1,val=20 > user getsi a rather confusing error message:
gets > "Invalid node 128, max possible could be 128" > > Where 128 is number of nodes that QEMU supports (MAX_NODES), > while src/dst is an index up to that limit, so it should be > MAX_NODES - 1 in error message. > Make error message to explicitly state valid range for node > index to be more clear. > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> > --- > numa.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/numa.c b/numa.c > index a3637cc..dedc149 100644 > --- a/numa.c > +++ b/numa.c > @@ -142,8 +142,8 @@ static void parse_numa_distance(NumaDistOptions *dist, > Error **errp) > > if (src >= MAX_NODES || dst >= MAX_NODES) { > error_setg(errp, > - "Invalid node %d, max possible could be %d", > - MAX(src, dst), MAX_NODES); > + "Invalid node %d, should be in range [0 - %d]", How about "Invalid node %d. The valid node range is [0, %d]." ? > + MAX(src, dst), MAX_NODES - 1); > return; > } > > -- > 2.7.4 > > Besides the nits Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <drjo...@redhat.com> Thanks, drew