On Fri, 2023-12-15 at 22:24 -0500, Benjamin Marzinski wrote: > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 06:17:18PM +0100, Martin Wilck wrote: > > On Tue, 2023-12-12 at 18:53 -0500, Benjamin Marzinski wrote: > > > Some of the client handlers checked for paths by both dev and > > > devt, > > > but > > > not all. Also, many of the client handlers don't print anything > > > if > > > they > > > failed to find a path. Make all the client handlers which work on > > > path > > > devices use a new function, find_path_by_str(), which will try > > > both > > > methods to find a path, and can print out an error message if > > > none is > > > found. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Marzinski <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > multipathd/cli_handlers.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++------------- > > > ---- > > > -- > > > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/multipathd/cli_handlers.c > > > b/multipathd/cli_handlers.c > > > index 063a771f..7f550030 100644 > > > --- a/multipathd/cli_handlers.c > > > +++ b/multipathd/cli_handlers.c > > > @@ -33,6 +33,20 @@ > > > #include "cli_handlers.h" > > > #include "devmapper.h" > > > > > > +static struct path * > > > +find_path_by_str(const struct _vector *pathvec, const char *str, > > > + const char *action_str) > > > +{ > > > + struct path *pp; > > > + > > > + if (!(pp = find_path_by_dev(pathvec, str))) > > > + pp = find_path_by_devt(pathvec, str); > > > > I wonder if devt should be tried first. It doesn't make a real > > difference because no real-world devices will have major:minor > > names, > > and the callers in the old code did it the other way around, too; > > but > > it would feel more correct to me. > > I'm fine with switching the order. Also, I assume you'd like the log > level to be set to 2, right?
Yes. Regards Martin
