Re: [libvirt] [PATCH]lxc: fix an improper comment in lxc_process

> -----Original Message----- > From: Osier Yang [mailto:jyang@redhat.com] > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 3:34 PM > To: Chen Hanxiao > Cc: libvir-list(a)redhat.com > Subject: Re: [libvirt] [PATCH]lxc: fix an improper comment in lxc_process > > On 14/10/13 14:22, Chen Hanxiao wrote: >> From: Chen Hanxiao <chenhanxiao(a)cn.fujitsu.com&gt; >> >> Fix an improper comment when libvirt has released all resources >> for lxc. >> Then original comment says "stopped" rather than "released". >> >> Signed-off-by: Chen Hanxiao <chenhanxiao(a)cn.fujitsu.com&gt; >> --- >> src/lxc/lxc_process.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/src/lxc/lxc_process.c b/src/lxc/lxc_process.c >> index d07ff13..7746c9b 100644 >> --- a/src/lxc/lxc_process.c >> +++ b/src/lxc/lxc_process.c >> @@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ static void virLXCProcessCleanup(virLXCDriverPtr > driver, >> virSystemdTerminateMachine(vm->def->name, "lxc", true); >> >> >> - /* now that we know it's stopped call the hook if present */ > I see no problem here, given that "it" means the vm process here. It > might be better to have a comma after "stopped" though, with explicitly > pointing out what "it" stands for. I.e. > In this function will handle two scenario: a) a LXC guest is stopped b) libvirt has released all resources But the comments are the SAME. That are not what intended. I think it's more clear if we could distinguish them.