Re: [libvirt] PATCH: 14/28: Thread safety for network driver

On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 09:44:50AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 10:32:58AM +0100, Daniel Veillard wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 11:55:51PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > This patch makes the network driver thread safe, following the pattern of > > > the earlier patches > > > > > @@ -95,6 +107,7 @@ networkAutostartConfigs(struct network_d > > > unsigned int i; > > > > Hum, you're not locking the driver itself during the loop ? > > If a concurrent call were to remove one of the network object in > > the meantime, that would lead to potentially random memory accesses > > no ? > > There are only two callers of this method, and they both already hold the > driver lock - networkStartup() and networkReload(). I realized that when digging more in the storage case... see next mail :-) > > > cleanup: > > > + if (network) > > > + virNetworkObjUnlock(network); > > > > like for domain, I would suggest the unlocking accessor to accept NULL > > and drop all the if constructs > > I've thought about doing that, but wasn't really sure whether it was good > idea or not. I thought it might hide bugs, but on balance it would certainly > simplify alot of code. If people generally think its worth allowing NULL > in the Unlock routine, i'll make it so. well we did a similar change for freeing ...