It looks good to me. -- Renaud
Tony Nguyen wrote: > David & Renaud, > > Thank you both for the comments. My responses inline. > > -tony > > David Bustos wrote: >> Quoth Tony Nguyen on Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 01:21:01PM -0700: >>> Webrev: http://cr.opensolaris.org/~tonyn/6710856/ >> - s/shouldn not/should not/ in the bug synopsis. > > done > >> cmd/svc/configd/rc_node.c >> 7207: Please add a comment explaining that the name is already being >> tracked, so we don't have to do anything. > > done > >> 7208: This will leak f. > > done > >> 7218: I haven't investigated this too much, but it's not clear to me >> that we shouldn't do this if we're already watching the name. Do >> you know why? > > I agree with you both. It's not safe to assume the existence of a name > implies an active client. > > Please have another look at the webrev > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~tonyn/6710856/ > > Renaud, I opted for another free() rather than strdup when assigning to > arr[i] as that would require another pthread_mutex_unlock(), reads > "lazy" :^) > _______________________________________________ > smf-discuss mailing list > smf-discuss at opensolaris.org
