Re: [libvirt] hash.c patches
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 05:07:43PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
Thanks for your efforts so far; I've run out of time to review
them much
today, other than to point out that the patches state n/8 but there are
only 6 of them.
Oops, indeed, sorry for the confusion, the other 2 were unrelated cleanups
I didn't want to send with the others, and I didn't pay attention the
patch count was in the name :-/
Also, a question on 5/8, where you added calls to the OOM reporter -
did
you check that all hash table clients elsewhere in the code base are not
duplicating the call when they get a NULL return?
Nope, I hadn't thought of checking that. I did it now, and indeed there were
some places where virReportOOMError was called upon virHash call errors.
Most of the time it was not called though, so having virHash functions
directly call it help to make things more consistent.
Yes, we prefer one patch per email all threaded together (git
send-email
-8 can do the right thing)
Ok, I just tried doing this with this patch series with 2 additional patches
related to your comment above, I hope this will work ok :)
Christophe
Attachments:
- attachment.sig (application/pgp-signature — 198 bytes)