From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:39385)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1RB6Ga-0005a5-Va
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 10:46:45 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1RB6GZ-0002un-TN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 10:46:44 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:30103)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1RB6GZ-0002ub-Fv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 10:46:43 -0400
From: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E8B17B6.2030903@codemonkey.ws> (Anthony Liguori's message of
	"Tue, 04 Oct 2011 09:27:02 -0500")
References: <cover.1316782367.git.quintela@redhat.com>
	<8247c5c1b6078349a1c87e3524b3b7d051df9802.1316782367.git.quintela@redhat.com>
	<4E8B17B6.2030903@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 16:46:39 +0200
Message-ID: <m3ipo4ddbk.fsf@trasno.mitica>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 15/23] migration: use global variable
	directly
Reply-To: quintela@redhat.com
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: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> wrote:

> How about we compromise and add a:
>
> MigrationState *migrate_get_current(void);

I can agree with this one.

> I'm strongly opposed to propagating direct usage of a global.  If it's
> at least a function call, that's a bit nicer.

What I am against is with trying to "hide" the fact that we are using a
global.  function accessor looks ok enough.