On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 05:49:39PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 09/25/2012 02:29 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > There is no need to hold the mutex when unref'ing
> > virObject instances
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > src/conf/domain_conf.c | 4 +---
> > src/qemu/qemu_driver.c | 4 ++--
> > src/rpc/virnetserver.c | 3 ---
> > 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> ACK.
>
> >
> > diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.c b/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> > index 4aa08d0..0514540 100644
> > --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> > +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> > @@ -741,9 +741,7 @@ static void
> > virDomainObjListDataFree(void *payload, const void *name ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
> > {
> > virDomainObjPtr obj = payload;
> > - virDomainObjLock(obj);
> > - if (virObjectUnref(obj))
> > - virDomainObjUnlock(obj);
> > + virObjectUnref(obj);
> > }
>
> We now have several of these one-liner cleanup functions. Is it worth
> making a common hash wrapper function that calls virObjectUnref on the
> object, rather than having to reinvent lots of one-liners, as a followup
> patch?
Yes, it probably is worthwhile. I actually remember you mentioning this
when I first posted the virObject patches
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list