Am 12.01.2016 um 19:02 hat John Snow geschrieben: > > > On 01/12/2016 01:01 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > > > > On 12/01/2016 18:57, John Snow wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 01/12/2016 03:46 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On 12/01/2016 01:36, John Snow wrote: > >>>> Instead of relying on peeking at bs->job, we want to explicitly get > >>>> a reference to the job that was involved in this notifier callback. > >>>> > >>>> Extend the Notifier to include a job pointer, and include a reference > >>>> to the job registering the callback. This cuts out a few more cases > >>>> where we have to rely on bs->job. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: John Snow <js...@redhat.com> > >>> > >>> Why don't you just put the NotifierWithReturn inside the BackupBlockJob > >>> struct, and use container_of to get from NWR to BackupBlockJob? > >>> > >>> Paolo > >>> > >> > >> That's another way (including the notifier within the job vs. including > >> the job within the notifier.) This one simply occurred to me first. Any > >> strong benefit to that method, or just a matter of style? > > > > It's usually the one that is used with notifiers, no other reason. > > I'll follow convention, I just didn't bump into an example to model.
This means that I should wait for a v2? (Hm, or is this Markus' area, actually? Or Jeff's?) Otherwise, this series is: Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com>
