Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 for-4.6 3/3] tools/libxl: Only continue stream operations if the stream is still in progress

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 15:17 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-07-28 at 18:07 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 for-4.6 3/3] tools/libxl: Only 
> > continue stream operations if the stream is still in progress"):
> > > check_all_finished() must only ever be called once for each started
> > > task.  Having
> > > 
> > > if ( inuse )
> > >     continue()
> > > else
> > >     check_all_finished()
> > > 
> > > will make it far more likely to accidentally fire the overall stream
> > > callback twice.
> > 
> > I think extra calls to check_all_finished are harmless.
> > 
> > But anyway, I can see that this conversation isn't really converging.
> > I think there is no functional difference between the two approaches
> > we are debating.  So this comes down to a matter of taste.
> > 
> > I don't want to put my foot down as maintainer, especially since you
> > wrote most of this code.  So, I think the bikeshed might as well be
> > your favoured shade of orange:
> > 
> > Acked-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> This is an ack to the patch in <
> 1438015647-25377-4-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> i.e. the
> original 3/3 of this posting, right?
> 
> (and not, for example, an ack to some other proposal made during this
> thread)

Nevermind, I see now that this came back in "Fix libxl TOOLSTACK records
for migration v2" with the ack in place.

Ian.

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