From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] xl: make error reporting of cpupool
 subcommands consistent
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 16:24:35 +0000
Message-ID: <20150311162435.GD1643@zion.uk.xensource.com>
References: <20150306170758.7269.53821.stgit@Solace.station>
	<20150306172159.7269.37267.stgit@Solace.station>
	<20150309110122.GK18491@zion.uk.xensource.com>
	<1426085551.21353.254.camel@citrix.com>
	<20150311150444.GA1643@zion.uk.xensource.com>
	<1426086800.21405.8.camel@citrix.com>
	<20150311152302.GC1643@zion.uk.xensource.com>
	<1426090918.21405.12.camel@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1426090918.21405.12.camel@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
Cc: "JGross@suse.com" <JGross@suse.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 04:22:00PM +0000, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 15:23 +0000, Wei Liu wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 03:13:33PM +0000, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 15:04 +0000, Wei Liu wrote:
> 
> > > > Since we haven't explicitly defined any return value in xl manpage, I
> > > > think we should use EXIT_SUCCESS and EXIT_FAILURE per exit(3). 
> > > >
> > > I like the idea.
> > > 
> > > > They are
> > > > more appropriate then 0 and 1.
> > > > 
> > > Indeed. However, as far as this patch is concerned, what should I do?
> > > 
> > >  b) keep it, we'll convert the 0/1 to EXIT_SUCCESS/FAILURE in later
> > >     patch(es)
> 
> > > ?
> > > 
> > > My opinion, I don't like c), so I'd go for either a) or b), with a
> > > slight preference for b).
> > > 
> > 
> > I think b) is good.
> > 
> Right. It was the only comment you made on this patch... does that means
> I can stick your Acked/Reviewed -by tag to it when sending v2?
> 

Yes. 

Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>

> Dario