Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] tools/libxl: Improvements to libxl-save-helper when using valgrind

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [PATCH] tools/libxl: Improvements to 
libxl-save-helper when using valgrind"):
> On 10/04/14 19:09, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Andrew Cooper writes ("[PATCH] tools/libxl: Improvements to 
> > libxl-save-helper when using valgrind"):
> >>  * The destroy() function has been modified to be less antisocial.
> >
> > Why ?  Who calls the destroy function ?  It's even less appropriate to
> > destroy this thing now that it's allocated statically.
> 
> Only on manual calls to xtl_logger_destroy(), which don't check for
> NULLness of the function pointer before calling it.

This logger is never destroyed, though, is it.  When you say "manual
calls" you don't mean the end user.  And there are no such calls on
this logger.

The reason I provided a function which calls abort() is that in case
someone did foolishly try to destroy it, it produces a better stack
trace.

Thanks,
Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel