On 04/12/2013 11:57 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 01:54:56PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:--- a/cmds-balance.c +++ b/cmds-balance.c @@ -662,8 +662,12 @@ static int cmd_balance_status(int argc, char **argv) close(fd); if (ret < 0) { + if (e == ENOTCONN) { + printf("No balance found on '%s'\n", path); + return 0; + } fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: balance status on '%s' failed - %s\n", - path, (e == ENOTCONN) ? "Not in progress" : strerror(e));I'm not sure if we want to change the error code if balance is not in progress. That's the only way to find out if it is so. Let's say that I have this shell code as a balance monitor and expect it to finish when the balance finishes: while btrfs fi balance status; do sleep 5; done not possible after your change. What we can do is to differentiate the status by a different error code number, let's say 1 for an error and 2 for 'not in progress'.+ path, strerror(e)); return 19; }
Thanks for the review. good point. Hope the below return code will suffice /* * return codes: * -1 : Error, failed to know if there is any pending balance * 1 : Successful to know status of a pending balance * 0 : when there is no pending balance or completed */ OR do we prefer /* * return codes: * -1 : Error, failed to know if there is any pending balance * 0 : Successful to know status of a pending balance * 1 : when there is no pending balance or completed */ I am fine with either. Thanks, Anand -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
