From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37385)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <imammedo@redhat.com>) id 1YbVBE-0000g4-Mo
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 10:24:13 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <imammedo@redhat.com>) id 1YbVB9-0002l3-67
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 10:24:12 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42670)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <imammedo@redhat.com>) id 1YbVB8-0002kv-UP
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 10:24:07 -0400
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 15:24:02 +0100
From: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20150327152402.57b2f844@nial.brq.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <55146D0F.6040309@redhat.com>
References: <1427388174-30915-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com>
	<55146D0F.6040309@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] fix assertion in "info memory-devices" if
 memdev isn't accessible
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: lcapitulino@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, afaerber@suse.de, lma@suse.com

On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 21:33:19 +0100
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 26/03/2015 17:42, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > +            mdevid = object_property_get_str(OBJECT(dimm->hostmem), "id",
> > +                                             &error_abort);
> > +            mdevpath = g_strdup_printf("/objects/%s", mdevid);
> > +            g_free(mdevid);
> > +            mdev = object_resolve_path_type(mdevpath, TYPE_MEMORY_BACKEND,
> > +                                            NULL);
> 
> You can add a backend with id xyz, remove it, and add another with the
> same id, right?
right, but in the end it compares pointers to hostmem so it safe.
but can_be_deleted() is more generic hence more preferred.

> 
> I think the can_be_deleted solution is better and not more invasive,
> even for 2.3.
> 
> Paolo
>