Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] review For Oracle bug 14470382

[Jason Luan <luanjianhai@xxxxxxx>]

ä 2013å01æ18æ 18:26, Jan Beulich åé:
> > > > On 18.01.13 at 11:08, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > However a single xenbus_printf as used here doesn't need a transaction
> > since it is only a single atomic operation.
> Right.
If the fact is that, the code will be simple. i will modify it.
> > On the other hand I'm not convinced that the initial read of the current
> > state didn't ought to be inside the transaction too, although I've not
> > thought about it terribly hard...
> I don't think so - this is just a safeguard, and I think it could as
> well look directly at dev->state.
Right, this is just a safeguard. you think that the below way is better?

if (dev->state != XenbusStateConnected)
    return;

> Jan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Thanks,
Jason


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