From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43412)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <arei.gonglei@huawei.com>) id 1XhD1I-0007Qw-Nc
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 03:41:21 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <arei.gonglei@huawei.com>) id 1XhD1D-0004gG-Sk
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 03:41:16 -0400
Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.65]:22495)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <arei.gonglei@huawei.com>) id 1XhD1D-0004fK-5e
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 03:41:11 -0400
Message-ID: <5448B0EE.6030701@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 15:40:30 +0800
From: Gonglei <arei.gonglei@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1414042783-2180-1-git-send-email-arei.gonglei@huawei.com>
	<1414042783-2180-2-git-send-email-arei.gonglei@huawei.com>
	<5448A9C3.1010804@msgid.tls.msk.ru>
In-Reply-To: <5448A9C3.1010804@msgid.tls.msk.ru>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] vnc: remove superfluous
	vnc_display_close()
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: Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>
Cc: "Huangpeng (Peter)" <peter.huangpeng@huawei.com>, "Huangweidong (C)" <weidong.huang@huawei.com>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, "kraxel@redhat.com" <kraxel@redhat.com>

On 2014/10/23 15:09, Michael Tokarev wrote:

> On 10/23/2014 09:39 AM, arei.gonglei@huawei.com wrote:
>> From: Gonglei <arei.gonglei@huawei.com>
>>
>> vnc_display_close() is called in vnc_display_open().
>> And in this moment, the ds variable is initilized
>> at vnc_display_init(). Calling vnc_display_close()
>> is superfluous.
> 
> Maybe the intent was to be able to open/close new vnc
> displays in the future?  I think I've seen patches to
> allow several vnc displays at once...
> 

I also saw Gerd's patch series for multiple vnc server instances.
But every vnc server has its own vnc status, they shouldn't
influence with each other. :) This logic is the same, initialize and
close immediately (the close process is superfluous).

Best regards,
-Gonglei