On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:20:34AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/17/2017 08:26 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>
> > It isn't that simple - this isn't a mere matter of checking data. The use
> > of the getters during the setter method is a fundamental requirement. At
> > the C layer we have many
On 02/17/2017 08:26 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> It isn't that simple - this isn't a mere matter of checking data. The use
> of the getters during the setter method is a fundamental requirement. At
> the C layer we have many distinct data types - eg int, unsigned int,
> long long, unsigned
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 02:26:21PM +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 03:22:12PM +0100, Erik Skultety wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 07:19:25PM +0800, Jie Wang wrote:
> >
> > Just a nit that we tend to prefix the patch with [libvirt-python] instead of
> > just
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 03:22:12PM +0100, Erik Skultety wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 07:19:25PM +0800, Jie Wang wrote:
>
> Just a nit that we tend to prefix the patch with [libvirt-python] instead of
> just [libvirt] so it's absolutely clear which repository you're sending the
> patch against
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 07:19:25PM +0800, Jie Wang wrote:
Just a nit that we tend to prefix the patch with [libvirt-python] instead of
just [libvirt] so it's absolutely clear which repository you're sending the
patch against and in this case it's a python bindings fix.
> As
As virDomainGetBlkioParameters is called in libvirt_virDomainSetBlkioParameters,
it will result in the two flags 'VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE' and
'VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_CONFIG'
are mutually exclusive in libvirt_virDomainSetBlkioParameters, it's
unreasonable,
So ues this patch to fix it.
Signed-off-by:
Because of virDomainGetBlkioParameters is called in
libvirt_virDomainSetBlkioParameters,
it will result in the two flags 'VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE' and
'VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_CONFIG'
are mutually exclusive in libvirt_virDomainSetBlkioParameters, it's
unreasonable,
So ues this patch to fix it.
