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(a)redhat.com>
>
> There is no need to hold the mutex when unref'ing
> virObject instances
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrange <berrange(a)redhat.com>
> ---
> 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 :|