[...] >>> >>> With the patch split in 2 introducing 2 distinct changes + the NULL check: >>> Reviewed-by: Erik Skultety <eskultet@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Hopefully you reconsider the desire for 2 patches... > > Well, since I was apparently fine with the change when reviewing the same > changes to nodedev, I guess I should be fine with it now too, I don't know what > made me change my opinion as time has passed, nevermind, it's not a deal breaker > for me. > OK - thanks - I did note while looking deeper that I didn't remove virInterfaceObjListFree() from src/conf/virinterfaceobj.h, so I removed it... >> >>> >>> >>> PS: I'm also sad, that we have two backends here just like we have in nodedev >>> with one of them being essentially useless (just like in nodedev) we have this >>> 'conf' generic code (just like in nodedev), yet in this case it's only used in >>> the test driver. I'd very much appreciate if those backends could be adjusted >>> in a way where we could make use of these functions. I can also imagine a >>> cooperation of the udev backend with the nodedev driver where we have an active >>> connection to the monitor, thus reacting to all events realtime, instead of >>> defining a bunch of filters and then letting udev re-enumerate the list of >>> interfaces each and every time (and by saying that I'm also aware that udev is >>> actually the useless backend here). >>> >>> Erik >>> >> >> Yeah - the driver code here is quite different/strange and could >> possibly use a bit more convergence. I feel too battered and bruised >> over this convergence right now though ;-).... Besides the differences > > I hope it didn't sound like a request, it was meant to be more like a wish that > we should do something about it (sometime). > > Erik > I didn't take it that way... Just making sure no one would be waiting for patches from me any time soon that did that type of convergence ;-) Tks - John -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
