On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 04:57:17PM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> > There's no requirement to plug devices in ascending
slot order - we can
> > have gaps at will with any ordering.
>
> At this point, I'm starting to think that we can just drop this 2/2
> patch and not worry about nextslot being stable across libvirtd restarts.
Which means we don't even need most of 1/2 since the reason for changing the
hash payload to be a structure instead of a string was this second patch.
So what do you think, should I push it as is or make a smaller patch which
would just fix OOM checking when PCI addresses are converted to strings?
Yep, lets do a simpler patch
Daniel
--
|: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o-
http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
|:
http://libvirt.org -o-
http://virt-manager.org -o-
http://deltacloud.org :|
|:
http://autobuild.org -o-
http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|