>
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 02:43:22AM -0400, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> > I think that my reasoning is more focuses on the "get refcounting for free"
> > not being
> > a great design so willing to change and I prefer a compile error in the
> > future
> > instead on the "base type".
>
> Well, this
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 02:43:22AM -0400, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> I think that my reasoning is more focuses on the "get refcounting for free"
> not being
> a great design so willing to change and I prefer a compile error in the future
> instead on the "base type".
Well, this makes the intent of
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:09:47AM +0100, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> > vdi_port_read_buf_release is registered passing data as
> > RedVDIReadBuf*, not RedPipeItem*. Cast opaque to proper
> > pointer type to avoid the assumption that first field of
> > RedVDIReadBuf is a RedPipeItem.
>
> My
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:09:47AM +0100, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> vdi_port_read_buf_release is registered passing data as
> RedVDIReadBuf*, not RedPipeItem*. Cast opaque to proper
> pointer type to avoid the assumption that first field of
> RedVDIReadBuf is a RedPipeItem.
My initial objection
On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 10:09 +0100, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> vdi_port_read_buf_release is registered passing data as
> RedVDIReadBuf*, not RedPipeItem*. Cast opaque to proper
> pointer type to avoid the assumption that first field of
> RedVDIReadBuf is a RedPipeItem.
>
> Signed-off-by: Frediano
vdi_port_read_buf_release is registered passing data as
RedVDIReadBuf*, not RedPipeItem*. Cast opaque to proper
pointer type to avoid the assumption that first field of
RedVDIReadBuf is a RedPipeItem.
Signed-off-by: Frediano Ziglio
---
server/reds.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed,