Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Personally, I think those are bad semantics for virStorageBackendStablePath; assuming it succeeds, you should always be able to know that you have a copy, regardless of whether the copy is the same as the original. Should I change virStorageBackendStablePath to those semantics, in which case your below code would then be correct?
Yes, I think that's worth doing - will also avoid the cast in the input arg there
OK, updated patch attached; virStorageBackendStablePath now always returns a copy of the given string, so it's always safe to unconditionally VIR_FREE it. I fixed up storage_backend_iscsi and storage_backend_disk to reflect this change. I also re-worked the code as you suggested, and added a bit more error checking. Signed-off-by: Chris Lalancette <clalance@redhat.com>