Re: [PATCH] storage: Remove redundant refreshPool check

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 09:20:19AM -0400, John Ferlan wrote:


On 06/23/2016 09:03 AM, Cole Robinson wrote:
On 06/23/2016 03:32 AM, Martin Kletzander wrote:
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 08:29:35PM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote:
Every driver provides a refreshPool impl, and many other critical
places in the code unconditionally call it without checking if
it exists, so this check is pointless

I'm not entirely sure about it, but it'd be nicer if we actually checked
that it's non-NULL.  Just to future-proof the code in case someone adds
another backend.

Please check the other storage_driver.c code... every 'startPool' invocation
is followed by an uncondtional refreshPool call. If a driver is added without
a refreshPool impl, it will crash libvirtd from any avenue that the pool can
be started, so to support a driver like that will need much more work. This is
the one place in the code that checks for backend->refreshPool


Hmm.. this check was caused by commit id '4a85bf3e2' where IIRC I was
probably being really paranoid.

Digging a bit more finds commit id '318ea3cb77' which seems to indicate
refreshPool *must* be supplied.

So ACK to the change,


Fair enough, sorry for the noise, ACK.

John

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list

[Index of Archives]     [Virt Tools]     [Libvirt Users]     [Lib OS Info]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]