* Zhang Chen (chen.zh...@intel.com) wrote: > From: Zhang Chen <chen.zh...@intel.com> > > Signed-off-by: Zhang Chen <chen.zh...@intel.com>
OK, we should make that properly return an error. (Actually we should make the failover command be one of the new OOB commands; so that it can work even if the main loop is blocked- that would make COLO robust properly against network failures) Reviewed-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert <dgilb...@redhat.com> > --- > migration/colo.c | 10 ++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/migration/colo.c b/migration/colo.c > index dbe2b88807..d1ae2e6d11 100644 > --- a/migration/colo.c > +++ b/migration/colo.c > @@ -197,10 +197,16 @@ void colo_do_failover(MigrationState *s) > vm_stop_force_state(RUN_STATE_COLO); > } > > - if (get_colo_mode() == COLO_MODE_PRIMARY) { > + switch (get_colo_mode()) { > + case COLO_MODE_PRIMARY: > primary_vm_do_failover(); > - } else { > + break; > + case COLO_MODE_SECONDARY: > secondary_vm_do_failover(); > + break; > + default: > + error_report("colo_do_failover failed because the colo mode" > + " could not be obtained"); > } > } > > -- > 2.17.GIT > -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK