On 04/14/2011 11:42 AM, Michal Novotny wrote: > [snip] > > I've fixed those OOMErrors and the whitespace already for v3 however I > won't send the v3 of the patch until I get reply to this since some > other approach may have to be chosen for the port = 0 things. comments > inline ... > > >> Hmm, why exactly are these port = 0 changes needed? Were they breaking >> some tests? > > > Exactly. It was breaking almost all of the xmconfigtests and > sexpr2xmltests. The reason was that it was never set in the code to > setup just one serial/parallel port and this is why it was breaking it. > That's the reason for those changes to port = 0. > Yeah, at first I didn't think they were necessary, but I see now that they are. Reason being that we only do the port allocation when parsing XML, not when formatting any random DomainDefPtr like I was assuming. So it's better to have all the callers manually set a target port if building a ChrDefPtr by hand. Sorry for the noise. Thanks, Cole > [snip] > >> I think these test files would be better named serial-target-port-auto. > > Good, I'll do that name change for v3. > > Thanks, > Michal > -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list