From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Jackson Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/27] tools/libxl: Fix libxl__ev_child_inuse() check for not-yet-initialised children Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 14:47:02 +0100 Message-ID: <21888.10454.890849.389495@mariner.uk.xensource.com> References: <1434375880-30914-1-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> <1434375880-30914-2-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> <1434460912.13744.147.camel@citrix.com> <55802669.6070209@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <55802669.6070209@citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Andrew Cooper Cc: Yang Hongyang , Wei Liu , Ian Campbell , Xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [PATCH 01/27] tools/libxl: Fix libxl__ev_child_inuse() check for not-yet-initialised children"): > It is possible that one bit fails before it can be calculated whether > the second bit needs to start or not. > > At the moment, all bits in libxl in this area do initialisation > immediately before use; most bits are even initialised in the function > which starts their actions. Some bits are initialised differently > depending on the path taken to get to the initialisation site. As a rule of thumb a function libxl__initiate_foo_ which takes a libxl__foo_state* should do this initialisation for the whole libxl__foo_state. I don't see why you can't do that. Ian.