[sheepdog] [PATCH v9 4/4] collie: check an error during issuing request correctly

[Hitoshi Mitake]

At Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:53:20 +0800,
Liu Yuan wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 05:44:45PM +0900, Hitoshi Mitake wrote:
> > Current collie checks error during issuing request by a return value
> > of collie_exec_req(). But it doesn't work well because
> > collie_exec_req() returns result code of the request. The code doesn't
> > represent that the request itself succeeded or not.
> > 
> > This patch lets collie_exec_req() return 0 or -1 for checking the
> > error which is caused during request issue. And also fixes invalid
> > error checking done in node_recovery().
> > 
> > In addtion, the last return statement of collie_exec_req() is changed
> > like this: return ret ? -1 : 0; This ternay operator is required
> > because exec_req() returns 1 when it fails. Some part of collie check
> > an error of collie_exec_req() by if (ret < ), and other part check by
> > if (ret). The above ternay operator is for avoiding return 1 and let
> > these error handlers work correct.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Hitoshi Mitake <mitake.hitoshi at lab.ntt.co.jp>
> > ---
> >  collie/common.c |    2 +-
> >  collie/node.c   |    3 +++
> >  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/collie/common.c b/collie/common.c
> > index 8c032ba..a480418 100644
> > --- a/collie/common.c
> > +++ b/collie/common.c
> > @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ int collie_exec_req(const char *host, int port, struct sd_req *hdr, void *buf)
> >  
> >  	sockfd_cache_put(&nid, sfd);
> >  
> > -	return rsp->result;
> > +	return ret ? -1 : 0;
> >  }
> >  
> >  /* Light request only contains header, without body content. */
> > diff --git a/collie/node.c b/collie/node.c
> > index 0cd7e7a..0339a45 100644
> > --- a/collie/node.c
> > +++ b/collie/node.c
> > @@ -138,6 +138,9 @@ static int node_recovery(int argc, char **argv)
> >  		sd_init_req(&req, SD_OP_STAT_RECOVERY);
> >  
> >  		ret = collie_exec_req(host, sd_nodes[i].nid.port, &req, NULL);
> > +		if (ret < 0)
> > +			return EXIT_SYSFAIL;
> > +
> >  		if (ret == SD_RES_NODE_IN_RECOVERY) {
> 
> rsp->result == SD_RES_NODE_IN_RECOVERY?

Thanks for your catching, I'll fix it later.

BTW, do you have any comments on 1 - 3rd patches of this series? If
these are ready for applying, I'd like to send fixed version of this
patch individually later.

Thanks,
Hitoshi