
29 Feb
2012
29 Feb
'12
8:43 a.m.
On Feb 29, 2012, at 9:51 AM, Laine Stump wrote: > Since I found a couple other problems, but have made you suffer > through > enough back and forth already, I've made some final suggested changes > myself, and am sending a diff patch as a response to this message > (differences from your latest version to mine), as well as doing a > repost of the original two patches with your latest changes and mine > squashed in. > > Please 1) take a look at the changes in my diff patches , then 2) test > the updated versions of the full patches (I'm unable to test beyond > compiling), and send your ACK if they're okay. Once I have your ACK > back, I'll push (I promise, I won't find any new issues *this* > time :-) > ACK. The code tests out fine. One nit I found in the logs was that the removal was indicated by the wrong method: diff --git a/src/util/virnetlink.c b/src/util/virnetlink.c index fd6f751..614f8da 100644 --- a/src/util/virnetlink.c +++ b/src/util/virnetlink.c @@ -509,7 +509,7 @@ virNetlinkEventRemoveClient(int watch, const unsigned char * virNetlinkEventRemoveClientPrimitive(i); VIR_DEBUG("removed client: %d by %s.", srv- >handles[i].watch, - srv->handles[i].watch ? "index" : "mac"); + srv->handles[i].watch ? "mac" : "index"); ret = 0; goto cleanup; } -- Thanks for the effort ! Dirk H