On Tue, 2016-01-19 at 15:17 +0800, Wen Congyang wrote: > For example: if the secondary host is down, and we fail to send the data > to > the secondary host. xc_domain_save() returns 0. So in the function > libxl__xc_domain_save_done(), rc is 0 (the helper program exits > normally), > and retval is 0 (it is xc_domain_save()'s return value). In such case, we > just need to complete the stream. > > Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang <we...@cn.fujitsu.com> > Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> > --- > tools/libxl/libxl.h | 4 ++++ > tools/libxl/libxl_stream_write.c | 14 ++++++++++++-- > 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl.h b/tools/libxl/libxl.h > index 7114491..df6c7a3 100644 > --- a/tools/libxl/libxl.h > +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl.h > @@ -1215,6 +1215,10 @@ int libxl_domain_resume(libxl_ctx *ctx, uint32_t > domid, int suspend_cancel, > const libxl_asyncop_how *ao_how) > LIBXL_EXTERNAL_CALLERS_ONLY; > > +/* > + * This function doesn't return until something is wrong, and we need to > + * do failover from secondary.
This function runs on the primary, doesn't it? and failover would be from primary to secondary. So I think a more accurate wording would be: /* * This function doesn't return unless something has gone wrong with the * replication to the secondary. If this function returns then the caller * should resume the (primary) domain. */ I'm happy to edit the text on commit if you agree with the proposed wording. The code looks good. Thanks, Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
