From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dario Faggioli <raistlin@linux.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libxl: document the memory ownership of
	some functions
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 17:19:26 +0200
Message-ID: <1339773566.4705.37.camel@Solace>
References: <6337a90a11ed2ef48442.1339768347@Solace>
	<20443.17026.774916.705627@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4487741690008278174=="
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <20443.17026.774916.705627@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org


--===============4487741690008278174==
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature";
	boundary="=-MUmHp1+K3YVypTv9xAnD"


--=-MUmHp1+K3YVypTv9xAnD
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 2012-06-15 at 15:11 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Perhaps it would be worth writing this comment once near the top, eg:
>=20
>  /* These functions each return (on success) an array of elements,
>   * and the length via the int* out parameter.  These arrays and
>   * their contents come from malloc, and must be freed with the
>   * corresponding libxl_THING_list_free function.
>   */
>=20
> And perhaps change  int *nb_domain  etc. to  int *nb_domain_out.
>=20
I like this, and I'm fine with going for this and respending. Just to be
sure, I'd need to gather all those functions together, moving them from
their current positions in the header... Would that be fine?

Thanks and Regards,
Dario

--=20
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://retis.sssup.it/people/faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)


--=-MUmHp1+K3YVypTv9xAnD
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAk/bUn4ACgkQk4XaBE3IOsQWfgCcCno7em7/vbkAIi5abCSoQn1N
u48AnR6kXos52FsEwuDtcOYukT+i/gFH
=sLyK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-MUmHp1+K3YVypTv9xAnD--



--===============4487741690008278174==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

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

--===============4487741690008278174==--