On 11/17/2015 11:34 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:31:32AM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/11/2015 02:28 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
Hi,
I think one of the prime reasons for #2861 was copy-pasting code. The
two attached patches reduce the code duplication and hopefully will make
future additions to Data Provider safer.
Ideas on different solutions are welcome!
+static errno_t be_sbus_req_reply(struct sbus_request *sbus_req,
+ const char *req_name,
+ int dp_err_type,
+ int errnum,
+ const char *errstr)
+{
+ const char *req_msg;
+ dbus_uint16_t err_maj;
+ dbus_uint32_t err_min;
+
+ err_maj = dp_err_type;
+ err_min = errnum;
+
+ req_msg = req_name ? req_name : "sbus";
^^ unused, along with req_name
Oops, now it is (I couldn't make my mind on how to report the caller,
feel free to suggest a better one)
+ return be_sbus_reply(sbus_req, err_maj, err_min, errstr);
+}
+static inline void be_sbus_reply_data_set(struct be_sbus_reply_data *rdata,
+ dbus_uint16_t err_maj,
+ dbus_uint32_t err_min,
+ const char *err_msg)
+{
if (rdata == NULL) {
DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "Bug: ...\n");
Done.
}
+ if (rdata) {
+ rdata->err_maj = err_maj;
+ rdata->err_min = err_min;
+ rdata->err_msg = err_msg;
+ }
+}
I like it!
Thanks, new patches are attached.
I had a phone call with Jakub and we decided that it will be better to
use be_req directly instead of lower level sbus_req. This will allow us
to simplify it more.
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/admin/lists/sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
