On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 10:26 +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote: > On Wed, 2016-04-06 at 13:45 +0200, Paulina Szubarczyk wrote: > > --- a/tools/libxl/xl_cmdimpl.c > > +++ b/tools/libxl/xl_cmdimpl.c > > @@ -3391,15 +3391,15 @@ static int set_memory_max(uint32_t domid, > > const char *mem) > > memorykb = parse_mem_size_kb(mem); > > if (memorykb == -1) { > > fprintf(stderr, "invalid memory size: %s\n", mem); > > - exit(3); > > + return 1; > > > Mmmm.. I see no reason why this can't remain exit(). In fact, it should > be turned int exit(EXIT_FAILURE), and there's Harmandeep's series -- > just resubmitted by me tonight-- outstanding that does that [1].
There was a discussion [2] that the exit() could be replaced by return 1 in the v1 of this patch, that is way I did here and in the following commits. Should it be rather reverted? > > In any case, this patch is probably not necessary any longer, not > because Harmandeep pending series, but because George take care of what > I think you're trying to do in here in > commit 0614c454209ac67016e2296577abfee9e9dcb012 already. In that George's commit the set_memory_* functions return EXIT_{FAILURE/SUCCESS}. Following the patches from Harmandeep's series I was going to changed them to return 1/0 and return EXIT_{FAILURE/SUCCESS} in main_* functions, after asking about that in that thread [3], though, you said there are exceptions too that in [1]. > > Regards, > Dario > > [1] http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-04/msg01099.html [2] http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-04/msg00384.html [3] http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-03/msg03422.html Paulina _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel