On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 06:40:46PM +0200, Marc Hartmayer wrote:
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:22 AM +0200, Marc Hartmayer <mhartmay@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 06:25 PM +0200, "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 08:16:54PM -0400, John Ferlan wrote:
[…snip…]
If the application wants to access 'opaque' outside the context of the callback function, it must take steps to ensure it is still alive in whatever thread it using it. This implies the data passed for 'opaque' should be ref-counted and they must hold a reference for their own usage, separately from the reference assoicated with the callback that will be released by @freecb.
That all said, we could take a slightly different approach if we want to be paranoid about this
eg move the
virConnectCloseCallbackDataPtr closeCallback;
out of the driver specific private structs, and put it in the main struct _virConnect instead.
This sound like a revert of commit “close callback: move it to driver” (88f09b75eb99415c). Shall we really do this?
Polite ping.
It is mostly a revert i think Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|