On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 10:37:39AM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote: > Under COLO, we are doing checkpoint on demand, if this > callback returns 1, we will take another checkpoint.
So 1 means OK. > 0 indicates unexpected error. Why not return an error? > > Signed-off-by: Yang Hongyang <hongyang.y...@easystack.cn> > Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang <we...@cn.fujitsu.com> > --- > tools/libxc/include/xenguest.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > tools/libxl/libxl_save_msgs_gen.pl | 7 ++++--- > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/libxc/include/xenguest.h b/tools/libxc/include/xenguest.h > index bd133af..88d6e13 100644 > --- a/tools/libxc/include/xenguest.h > +++ b/tools/libxc/include/xenguest.h > @@ -62,6 +62,15 @@ struct save_callbacks { > * 1: take another checkpoint */ > int (*checkpoint)(void* data); > > + /* > + * Called after the checkpoint callback. > + * > + * returns: > + * 0: terminate checkpointing gracefully checkpointing terminated gracefully Why not return -EXX instead ? > + * 1: take another checkpoint _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel