Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 2/3] fdstream: avoid child process leak on error

On 07/14/2011 11:42 AM, Matthias Bolte wrote: > 2011/7/12 Eric Blake <eblake(a)redhat.com&gt;: >> By requesting the pid in virCommandRunAsync, fdstream was claiming >> that it would manually wait for the process.  But on the failure >> path, the child process was being leaked. > > This difference in behavior between virCommandRunAsync(..., NULL) and > virCommandRunAsync(..., &pid) is not documented on virCommandRunAsync > itself but only on virCommandFree. That was the case in libvirt.git right now, but I thought I addressed that properly in patch 1/3.

> Also virCommandFree refers to > waitpid instead of you're newly added virPidWait. Oh, good point.  I'll tweak patch 1 to fix that before I push. > Finally I noticed > that the comments in command.h and command.c are out of sync (at least > for virCommandFree). Why are you documenting in two places making it > prone to get out of sync? Which file is better, the .c or the .h?  I'm fine with dropping docs from one of the two locations, if we have a preference on which file is more likely to be referenced. .c: PRO - the documentation is next to the implementation, and hopefully easier to keep the two in sync PRO - matches how we do things in libvirt.h vs. libvirt.c CON - much larger file to search through when you are looking up the reference .h: PRO - smaller file CON - further away from implementation, could go stale so I'm leaning towards .c only.