On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 07:25:59AM +0000, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 22:52 +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
This feels kind of sick - inventing a common shared struct between the two driver tables, when there isn't any common stuff to share :-(
Yeah. Although, as a way to share more code between domains and networks (especially in qemud), it might make sense.
Looking at the code, IMHO, the whole approach of iterating over the driver table soo many times is just wrong, when we can simply have an integer count recording how many drivers are registered. This eliminates both for(;;) loops, and reduces the amount of code to the point where I don't think there's anything to be gained by having a generic _virDriverRegister with all the type-casting this entails.
That sounds fine.
@@ -203,7 +166,21 @@ _virRegisterDriver(void *driver, int isN int virRegisterNetworkDriver(virNetworkDriverPtr driver) { - return _virRegisterDriver(driver, 1); + if (virInitialize() < 0) + return -1; + + if (driver == NULL) { + virLibConnError(NULL, VIR_ERR_INVALID_ARG, __FUNCTION__); + return(-1); + } + + if (virNetworkDriverTabCount >= (sizeof(virNetworkDriverTab)/sizeof(virNetworkDriverPtr))) {
Just use MAX_DRIVERS?
Committed with this change applied. I also fixed virConnectOpenReadonly which was not passing the readonly flag down to the network driver. Dan. -- |=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=| |=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=| |=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=| |=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=|