On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:56:23PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
On 01/12/2012 10:20 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> @@ -1103,9 +1163,32 @@ static int lxcControllerMain(int serverFd,
> }
>
> for (i = 0 ; i < nFds ; i++) {
> + consoles[i].epollFd = -1;
> + consoles[i].epollFd = -1;
Why do you have this line twice? Did you mean to initialize epollWatch
instead?
Yes, it should have been epollWatch.
> + consoles[i].hostWatch = -1;
> + consoles[i].contWatch = -1;
> + }
> +
> + for (i = 0 ; i < nFds ; i++) {
> consoles[i].hostFd = hostFds[i];
> consoles[i].contFd = contFds[i];
>
> + if ((consoles[i].epollFd = epoll_create(2)) < 0) {
Should we be using epoll_create1(EPOLL_CLOEXEC)?
We don't fork anything more, but I'll change it anyway just in case.
Daniel
--
|:
http://berrange.com -o-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|:
http://libvirt.org -o-
http://virt-manager.org :|
|:
http://autobuild.org -o-
http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|:
http://entangle-photo.org -o-
http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|