On 05/19/2017 11:29 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 04/26/2017 12:36 AM, John Ferlan wrote:
Create/use a helper to perform the object allocation
Signed-off-by: John Ferlan <jferlan@redhat.com> --- src/conf/virinterfaceobj.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/conf/virinterfaceobj.c b/src/conf/virinterfaceobj.c index 1cc5c92..4463653 100644 --- a/src/conf/virinterfaceobj.c +++ b/src/conf/virinterfaceobj.c @@ -46,6 +46,27 @@ struct _virInterfaceObjList {
/* virInterfaceObj manipulation */
+static virInterfaceObjPtr +virInterfaceObjNew(void) +{ + virInterfaceObjPtr obj; + + if (VIR_ALLOC(obj) < 0) + return NULL; + + if (virMutexInit(&obj->lock) < 0) { + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, + "%s", _("cannot initialize mutex")); + VIR_FREE(obj); + return NULL; + } + + virInterfaceObjLock(obj); + + return obj; +} + +
Any reason why virInterfaceObj can't actually be an virObject? virInterfaceObjLock() is so 0.9.X release-y.
Michal
I thought I tried that once - one large leap for mankind, but was asked to show all the tiny steps it took me to get there ;-) Also I didn't want the "overhead" of converting it to a virObject only to convert it later to the newer object. I mean I could now, but I have this goal of making all these driver objects use the same object around the same time. Some convert more easily since they already use virObject - others are a bit more effort. Still even if I convert it to a virObject now, that's not going to be done in "this" patch... John