On Tue, 2022-02-01 at 16:07 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 03:25:55PM +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 02:20:17PM +0100, Tim Wiederhake wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Tim Wiederhake <twiederh(a)redhat.com>
> > ---
> > src/lxc/lxc_driver.c | 6 +++---
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/lxc/lxc_driver.c b/src/lxc/lxc_driver.c
> > index 7bc39120ee..42053de9c3 100644
> > --- a/src/lxc/lxc_driver.c
> > +++ b/src/lxc/lxc_driver.c
> > @@ -4045,9 +4045,9 @@
> > lxcDomainDetachDeviceHostdevUSBLive(virLXCDriver *driver,
> > VIR_WARN("cannot deny device %s for domain %s: %s",
> > dst, vm->def->name, virGetLastErrorMessage());
> >
> > - virObjectLock(hostdev_mgr->activeUSBHostdevs);
> > - virUSBDeviceListDel(hostdev_mgr->activeUSBHostdevs, usb);
> > - virObjectUnlock(hostdev_mgr->activeUSBHostdevs);
> > + VIR_WITH_OBJECT_LOCK_GUARD(hostdev_mgr->activeUSBHostdevs) {
> > + virUSBDeviceListDel(hostdev_mgr->activeUSBHostdevs,
> > usb);
> > + }
>
> Even nicer you can omit the curly brackets and make this a +2/-3 ;)
> Otherwise I guess we'd need some kind of stylistic guide to keep us
> consistent in this regard right from the start.
My preference is the keep the scope of the guarded section explicit
using {} even with a 1 line body.
Same for me, fwiw.
Cheers,
Tim