On 06/13/2018 09:00 AM, John Ferlan wrote: > > On 06/13/2018 08:36 AM, Ján Tomko wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 08:26:40AM -0400, John Ferlan wrote: >>>> Or we could focus our energy elsehwere. >>>> >>> I like this option... Fix the one offs when/if they show up and move >>> on. If someone, some day has the desire to write patches that will >>> revamp device address assignment, good luck! >>> >> I meant not bothering with fixing this bug either. >> >> Jano > That's an option as well, IDC really. It didn't take that much time in > order to propose the initial solution or the followup. Probably spent > more energy and time typing and considering things based on review > questions or comments. If you feel compelled to close the bz, then by > all means do that. Another viable solution is proposed here. Nah, I think fixing the current BZ is a reasonable thing to do - current behavior is clearly wrong, but we don't need to worry about the case I mentioned until someone else complains (it's been like that for a *very* long time, and I think I may be the only one who noticed). My apologies for just dive bombing in with a new corner case without actually reviewing your code - it was the end of the day and I was tired, but also remembered running across that problem a long time ago (and deciding it wasn't worth the effort to fix then either) and just wanted to make other people aware of it before I forgot again :-P. I'll go back and actually review the patches now. -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
