On 12/24/18 3:59 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> Introduce a new virNetworPort object that will present an attachment to
> a virtual network from a VM.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/libvirt/libvirt-network.h | 49 +++++
> include/libvirt/virterror.h | 3 +
> src/datatypes.c | 60 +++++
> src/datatypes.h | 41 ++++
> src/driver-network.h | 27 +++
> src/libvirt-network.c | 351 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> src/libvirt_private.syms | 2 +
> src/libvirt_public.syms | 14 ++
> src/util/virerror.c | 9 +
> 9 files changed, 556 insertions(+)
>
> +/**
> + * virNetworkPortFree:
> + * @port: a network port object
> + *
> + * Free the network port object.
> + * The data structure is freed and should not be used thereafter.
> + *
> + * Returns 0 in case of success and -1 in case of failure.
> + */
> +int
> +virNetworkPortFree(virNetworkPortPtr port)
> +{
> + VIR_DEBUG("port=%p", port);
> +
> + virResetLastError();
> +
> + virCheckNetworkPortReturn(port, -1);
> +
> + virObjectUnref(port);
> + return 0;
Don't we want to make this accept NULL? I know we don't do it for some
other public free functions, but that was a mistake we can't fix (in
fact I think we could because one can argue that relying on
virDomainFree() returning -1 is a broken code anyway).
Michal
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
