On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 04:44:41PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 05:39:08PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > > + > > + pr "gl_recursive_lock_define_initialized(static, global_lock)\n"; > > static? > > I suspect this only allows one libguestfs handle per process into the > critical section at once. I think the lock needs to be per-handle > unless I'm misunderstanding what this is for.
Agreed, any locking should be per-handle, and I wouldn't expect to need to use recursive mutexes either. Internal libguestfs code shouldn't be calling back out to the public libguestfs API surely, so shouldn't need to have re-entrancy Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ Libguestfs mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libguestfs
