From nobody Wed Nov 5 06:44:48 2025 Delivered-To: importer@patchew.org Received-SPF: pass (zoho.com: domain of gnu.org designates 208.118.235.17 as permitted sender) client-ip=208.118.235.17; envelope-from=qemu-devel-bounces+importer=patchew.org@nongnu.org; helo=lists.gnu.org; Authentication-Results: mx.zohomail.com; spf=pass (zoho.com: domain of gnu.org designates 208.118.235.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+importer=patchew.org@nongnu.org Return-Path: Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [208.118.235.17]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1499701056963427.0773644477515; Mon, 10 Jul 2017 08:37:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([::1]:41426 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dUakf-0008J1-FF for importer@patchew.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2017 11:37:33 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55377) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dUago-0005R6-SZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2017 11:33:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dUago-0003V6-2y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2017 11:33:34 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53184) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dUagn-0003UW-T5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2017 11:33:34 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D56567CE0A; Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:33:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ovpn-116-74.gru2.redhat.com [10.97.116.74]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B1097D4ED; Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:33:32 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com D56567CE0A Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ehabkost@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com D56567CE0A Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:33:31 -0300 From: Eduardo Habkost To: Igor Mammedov Message-ID: <20170710153331.GC5167@localhost.localdomain> References: <20170707213052.13087-1-ehabkost@redhat.com> <20170707213052.13087-2-ehabkost@redhat.com> <20170710101041.553a792a@nial.brq.redhat.com> <20170710144557.GH12152@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170710144557.GH12152@localhost.localdomain> X-Fnord: you can see the fnord User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.28]); Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:33:33 +0000 (UTC) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] fixup! qom: Fix ambiguous path detection when ambiguous=NULL X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Paolo Bonzini , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4rber?= Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+importer=patchew.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" X-ZohoMail: RSF_0 Z_629925259 SPT_0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 11:45:57AM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:10:41AM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 18:30:51 -0300 > > Eduardo Habkost wrote: [...] > > > + > > > + object_unparent(obj1); > > > + object_unparent(obj2a); > > > + object_unparent(obj2b); > > Are above unparenting is necessary? > >=20 > > > + object_unparent(cont1); > > Wouldn't parent destruction sufficient to trigger > > implicit destruction of children? >=20 > Probably it is. I will test it. The obj1 and obj2a object_unparent() calls are really unnecessary. object_unparent(obj2b) is still necessary because it is attached direcly to root. Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost Reviewed-by: Igor Mammedov --- tests/check-qom-proplist.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/check-qom-proplist.c b/tests/check-qom-proplist.c index 381532c..432b665 100644 --- a/tests/check-qom-proplist.c +++ b/tests/check-qom-proplist.c @@ -605,8 +605,6 @@ static void test_qom_partial_path(void) g_assert(!ambiguous); g_assert(object_resolve_path("obj1", NULL) =3D=3D obj1); =20 - object_unparent(obj1); - object_unparent(obj2a); object_unparent(obj2b); object_unparent(cont1); } --=20 2.9.4 --=20 Eduardo