On 04/12/2013 11:57 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 01:54:56PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
--- a/cmds-balance.c
+++ b/cmds-balance.c
@@ -662,8 +662,12 @@ static int cmd_balance_status(int argc, char **argv)
close(fd);
if (ret < 0) {
+ if (e == ENOTCONN) {
+ printf("No balance found on '%s'\n", path);
+ return 0;
+ }
fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: balance status on '%s' failed - %s\n",
- path, (e == ENOTCONN) ? "Not in progress" : strerror(e));
I'm not sure if we want to change the error code if balance is not in
progress. That's the only way to find out if it is so.
Let's say that I have this shell code as a balance monitor and expect it
to finish when the balance finishes:
while btrfs fi balance status; do
sleep 5;
done
not possible after your change. What we can do is to differentiate the
status by a different error code number, let's say 1 for an error and 2
for 'not in progress'.
+ path, strerror(e));
return 19;
}
Thanks for the review. good point. Hope the below return
code will suffice
/*
* return codes:
* -1 : Error, failed to know if there is any pending balance
* 1 : Successful to know status of a pending balance
* 0 : when there is no pending balance or completed
*/
OR do we prefer
/*
* return codes:
* -1 : Error, failed to know if there is any pending balance
* 0 : Successful to know status of a pending balance
* 1 : when there is no pending balance or completed
*/
I am fine with either.
Thanks, Anand
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
