
29 Jan
2008
29 Jan
'08
1:47 a.m.
KR> Yes, since modify args. This is the new arg element that will KR> eventually be returned. Er, the rest of the function only seems to call CMAddArg(*args, ...), which doesn't necessitate a double pointer. Unless I missed something like: *args = CMNewArgs(...); then I think you're fine. KR> However, based on the suggestion above, I think things can be KR> reworked so that we won't need the double-pointer. Even better :) -- Dan Smith IBM Linux Technology Center Open Hypervisor Team email: danms@us.ibm.com