[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH V3 1/4] Rework value part of name-value pairs



On 10/27/2011 06:13 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 12:07:27PM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
NWFilters can be provided name-value pairs using the following
XML notiation:

       <filterref filter='xyz'>
         <parameter name='PORT' value='80'/>
         <parameter name='VAL' value='abc'/>
       </filterref>

The internal representation currently is so that a name is stored as a
string and the value as well. This patch now addresses the value part of it
and introduces a data structure for storing a value either as a simple
value or as an array for later support of lists (provided in python-like
notation ( [a,b,c] ).

This patch adjusts all code that was handling the values in hash tables
and makes it use the new data type.

Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger<stefanb linux vnet ibm com>

---
  src/conf/domain_conf.c                    |    2
  src/conf/nwfilter_params.c                |  288 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
  src/conf/nwfilter_params.h                |   38 +++
  src/libvirt_private.syms                  |    3
  src/nwfilter/nwfilter_ebiptables_driver.c |   15 +
  src/nwfilter/nwfilter_gentech_driver.c    |   27 ++
  src/nwfilter/nwfilter_learnipaddr.c       |   13 +
  7 files changed, 365 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
+bool
+virNWFilterVarValueDelValue(virNWFilterVarValuePtr val, const char *value)
+{
+    unsigned int i;
+
+    switch (val->valType) {
+    case NWFILTER_VALUE_TYPE_SIMPLE:
+        return false;
+
+    case NWFILTER_VALUE_TYPE_ARRAY:
+        for (i = 0; i<  val->u.array.nValues; i++) {
+            if (STREQ(value, val->u.array.values[i])) {
+                VIR_FREE(val->u.array.values[i]);
+                val->u.array.nValues--;
+                val->u.array.values[i] =
+                                val->u.array.values[val->u.array.nValues];
+                return true;
This doesn't look right. Consider

    | A | B | C | D | E |

And you're deleting 'B'. This code will result in a list

    | A | C | C | D |

We had nValues = 5 here. We remove item at i=1. nValues = 4 now. array[1] = array[4] = 'E' -> A | E | C | D.

But it's wrong since I should preserve the ordering of the elements. I fixed it. Will post a v4. Thanks for the review.

   Stefan


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]