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