On 1/15/24 16:58, Simon Horman wrote: > On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 02:54:03PM +0100, Ilya Maximets wrote: >> On 1/12/24 11:44, Simon Horman wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 11:49:04PM +0100, Ilya Maximets wrote: >>>> Small refactoring so we can re-use this function in later commits. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ilya Maximets <[email protected]> >>>> --- >>>> ovsdb/ovsdb-server.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- >>>> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/ovsdb/ovsdb-server.c b/ovsdb/ovsdb-server.c >>>> index 7f65cadfe..7e95b3813 100644 >>>> --- a/ovsdb/ovsdb-server.c >>>> +++ b/ovsdb/ovsdb-server.c >>>> @@ -316,6 +316,34 @@ main_loop(struct server_config *config, >>>> free(remotes_error); >>>> } >>>> >>>> +/* Parsing the relay in format 'relay:DB_NAME:<list of remotes>'. >>>> + * On success, returns 'true', 'name' is set to DB_NAME, 'remotes' to >>>> + * '<list of remotes>'. Caller is responsible of freeing 'name' and >>>> + * 'remotes'. On failure, returns 'false'. */ >>>> +static bool >>>> +parse_relay_args(const char *arg, char **name, char **remote) >>>> +{ >>>> + const char *relay_prefix = "relay:"; >>>> + const int relay_prefix_len = strlen(relay_prefix); >>>> + bool is_relay; >>>> + >>>> + is_relay = !strncmp(arg, relay_prefix, relay_prefix_len); >>>> + if (!is_relay) { >>>> + return false; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + *remote = strchr(arg + relay_prefix_len, ':'); >>>> + >>>> + if (!*remote || (*remote)[0] == '\0') { >>>> + *remote = NULL; >>>> + return false; >>> >>> Hi Ilya, >>> >>> Prior to this patch this condition would cause open_db() >>> to return an "invalid syntax" error message. Now it >>> will cause the (!is_relay) branch to be taken in open_db(). >>> >>> Is this intended? >> >> It's a side effect of extracting the function. But I'm not sure >> if it is a big deal. The condition here is that someone is trying >> to open a database named 'relay:'. They likely do not have a file >> named like that, so they will get a slightly different error while >> trying to open it. Should be clear enough for a user, I hope. >> >> What do you think? > > Thanks for the clarification, this seems fine to me. >
I acked all other patches in the series and I was waiting for this discussion to reach a conclusion. Now that it did: Acked-by: Dumitru Ceara <[email protected]> Regards, Dumitru _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
