From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35878)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1Ws9kb-0003KI-QJ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 07:53:10 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1Ws9kS-0002jB-P8
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 07:53:01 -0400
Received: from mail-we0-x22a.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c03::22a]:61497)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1Ws9kS-0002j2-Ij
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 07:52:52 -0400
Received: by mail-we0-f170.google.com with SMTP id u57so8437088wes.29
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 04:52:51 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 13:52:46 +0200
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20140604115246.GB11073@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
References: <1401561792-13410-1-git-send-email-mreitz@redhat.com>
	<1401561792-13410-2-git-send-email-mreitz@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1401561792-13410-2-git-send-email-mreitz@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC 1/5] nbd: Correct name comparison for
 export_set_name()
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>

On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 08:43:08PM +0200, Max Reitz wrote:
> exp->name == name is certainly true if both strings are equal and will
> work for both of them being NULL (which is important to check here);
> however, the strings may also be equal without having the same address,
> in which case there is no need to replace the export's name either.
> Therefore, add a check for this case.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
> ---
>  nbd.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/nbd.c b/nbd.c
> index e5084b6..0787cba 100644
> --- a/nbd.c
> +++ b/nbd.c
> @@ -832,7 +832,7 @@ NBDExport *nbd_export_find(const char *name)
>  
>  void nbd_export_set_name(NBDExport *exp, const char *name)
>  {
> -    if (exp->name == name) {
> +    if (exp->name == name || (exp->name && name && !strcmp(exp->name, name))) {
>          return;
>      }

It's not clear to me why we even bother.  The function is idempotent and
there are only 2 call sites in QEMU.  This is not a performance-critical
function where it helps to bail early.

Can we just drop the if statement completely?

void nbd_export_set_name(NBDExport *exp, const char *name)
{
    if (exp->name == name) {
        return;
    }

    nbd_export_get(exp);
    if (exp->name != NULL) {
        g_free(exp->name);
        exp->name = NULL;
        QTAILQ_REMOVE(&exports, exp, next);
        nbd_export_put(exp);
    }
    if (name != NULL) {
        nbd_export_get(exp);
        exp->name = g_strdup(name);
        QTAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(&exports, exp, next);
    }
    nbd_export_put(exp);
}