Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 1/7] qemu: Fix misleading comment for qemuDomainObjBeginJobWithDriver()

2012-10-11 Thread Peter Krempa
On 10/11/12 05:25, Eric Blake wrote: On 10/09/2012 07:39 AM, Peter Krempa wrote: The comment stated that you may call qemuDomainObjBeginJobWithDriver() without passing qemud_driver to signalize it's not locked. signalize is a valid spelling, but unusual; I'd write it 'signal'. qemuDomainObjB

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 1/7] qemu: Fix misleading comment for qemuDomainObjBeginJobWithDriver()

2012-10-10 Thread Eric Blake
On 10/09/2012 07:39 AM, Peter Krempa wrote: > The comment stated that you may call qemuDomainObjBeginJobWithDriver() > without passing qemud_driver to signalize it's not locked. signalize is a valid spelling, but unusual; I'd write it 'signal'. > qemuDomainObjBeginJobWithDriver still accesses the

[libvirt] [PATCH 1/7] qemu: Fix misleading comment for qemuDomainObjBeginJobWithDriver()

2012-10-09 Thread Peter Krempa
The comment stated that you may call qemuDomainObjBeginJobWithDriver() without passing qemud_driver to signalize it's not locked. qemuDomainObjBeginJobWithDriver still accesses the qemud_driver structure and the lock singalling is done through a separate parameter. --- src/qemu/qemu_domain.c | 3 +