On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 11:07:15AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 12.07.2018 21:45, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > The documentation for QOM is not clear about who owns references
> > to objects (i.e. who is responsible for calling object_unref()
> > later).
> >
> > This is important considering there
On 12.07.2018 21:45, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> The documentation for QOM is not clear about who owns references
> to objects (i.e. who is responsible for calling object_unref()
> later).
>
> This is important considering there are a few inconsistencies in
> the API (e.g. callers of object_new() nee
The documentation for QOM is not clear about who owns references
to objects (i.e. who is responsible for calling object_unref()
later).
This is important considering there are a few inconsistencies in
the API (e.g. callers of object_new() need to call object_unref()
later, but callers of object_ne
