[libvirt] [PATCH 15/17] conf: change virDomainNetRemove from static to global

[Michal Privoznik]

On 28.02.2012 21:14, Laine Stump wrote:
> This exact code is duplicated in qemuDomainDetachNetDevice().
> ---
> New patch in V2.
> 
> (yeah, I just noticed the movement of the virDomainHostdevXX()
> declarations in this patch; I guess I was rearranging for consistent
> ordering. If this concerns anyone, I can squash it out before I push.)
> 
>  src/conf/domain_conf.c   |    2 +-
>  src/conf/domain_conf.h   |    5 +++--
>  src/libvirt_private.syms |    1 +
>  3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.c b/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> index 7135024..b994718 100644
> --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> @@ -7084,7 +7084,7 @@ int virDomainNetIndexByMac(virDomainDefPtr def, const unsigned char *mac)
>      return -1;
>  }
>  
> -static void virDomainNetRemove(virDomainDefPtr def, size_t i)
> +void virDomainNetRemove(virDomainDefPtr def, size_t i)
>  {
>      virDomainNetDefPtr net = def->nets[i];
>  
> diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.h b/src/conf/domain_conf.h
> index 6ab5f32..a9426b3 100644
> --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.h
> +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.h
> @@ -1902,12 +1902,13 @@ int virDomainDiskRemoveByName(virDomainDefPtr def, const char *name);
>  
>  int virDomainNetIndexByMac(virDomainDefPtr def, const unsigned char *mac);
>  int virDomainNetInsert(virDomainDefPtr def, virDomainNetDefPtr net);
> +void virDomainNetRemove(virDomainDefPtr def, size_t i);
>  int virDomainNetRemoveByMac(virDomainDefPtr def, const unsigned char *mac);
>  
> -int virDomainHostdevInsert(virDomainDefPtr def, virDomainHostdevDefPtr hostdev);
> -void virDomainHostdevRemove(virDomainDefPtr def, size_t i);
>  int virDomainHostdevFind(virDomainDefPtr def, virDomainHostdevDefPtr match,
>                           virDomainHostdevDefPtr *found);
> +int virDomainHostdevInsert(virDomainDefPtr def, virDomainHostdevDefPtr hostdev);
> +void virDomainHostdevRemove(virDomainDefPtr def, size_t i);

Maybe my brain is too small for this, but this looks useless to me.
However, not a show stopper.

ACK

Michal