yes, using bool is better. Resubmit patch here: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/622407/
Thanks, William On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 04:08:42PM -0700, William Tu wrote: > > Definitely lost is reported by test 2026: ovn -- 3 HVs, 1 LS, 3 > lports/HV. > > ds_put_char__ (dynamic-string.c:82) > > ds_put_char (dynamic-string.h:88) > > process_escape_args (process.c:103) > > main (ovn-nbctl.c:92) > > Another leak shown at ovn-sbctl.c with similar pattern. > > > > Signed-off-by: William Tu <u9012...@gmail.com> > > The return value convention here is odd. It's returning a boolean, but > it calls it an int, and it uses 0 for success instead of 1. Please use > a real bool, with true for success and false for failure. > > Thanks, > > Ben. > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
