[libvirt] [PATCH v1 12/23] virtlockd: Work virSeclabelSpace in

[Michal Privoznik]

On 16.10.2015 09:32, Peter Krempa wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 12:25:57 +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> 
> A rather sparse commit message.
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn at redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  src/locking/lock_daemon.c          | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  src/locking/lock_daemon.h          |  8 +++++
>>  src/locking/lock_daemon_dispatch.c | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>  3 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> [...]
> 
>> diff --git a/src/locking/lock_daemon_dispatch.c b/src/locking/lock_daemon_dispatch.c
>> index 2d0bd81..5ad7e11 100644
>> --- a/src/locking/lock_daemon_dispatch.c
>> +++ b/src/locking/lock_daemon_dispatch.c
> 
> [...]
> 
>> @@ -433,21 +435,66 @@ virLockSpaceProtocolDispatchCreateLockSpace(virNetServerPtr server ATTRIBUTE_UNU
> 
> [...]
> 
>>  static int
>>  virLockSpaceProtocolDispatchRecallSeclabel(virNetServerPtr server ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
>> -                                           virNetServerClientPtr client ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
>> +                                           virNetServerClientPtr client,
>>                                             virNetMessagePtr msg ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
>> -                                           virNetMessageErrorPtr rerr ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
>> -                                           virLockSpaceProtocolRecallSeclabelArgs *args ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
>> -                                           virLockSpaceProtocolRecallSeclabelRet *ret ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>> +                                           virNetMessageErrorPtr rerr,
>> +                                           virLockSpaceProtocolRecallSeclabelArgs *args,
>> +                                           virLockSpaceProtocolRecallSeclabelRet *ret)
>>  {
>> -    return 0;
>> +    int rv = -1;
>> +    int funcRet;
>> +    virLockDaemonClientPtr priv =
>> +        virNetServerClientGetPrivateData(client);
>> +    char *label = NULL;
>> +    char **label_p = NULL;
>> +
>> +    virMutexLock(&priv->lock);
>> +
>> +    memset(ret, 0, sizeof(*ret));
>> +
>> +    funcRet = virLockDaemonRecallSeclabel(lockDaemon,
>> +                                          args->path, args->model, &label);
>> +
>> +    if (funcRet == 0 &&
>> +        (VIR_ALLOC(label_p) < 0 ||
>> +         VIR_STRDUP(*label_p, label) < 0))
> 
> This looks rather weird? Why is the extra pointer necessary?

It's due to way we handle remote strings. If that was remote NON NULL
string, then a single pointer would be enough, but since I want it to be
NULL sometimes I must do it this way. If you look at the remote
procedures we generate automatically you'll find the same pattern (in
fact I've copied the idea from there).

Michal