Right, I was just pointing out that solving this in os-vif isn't enough in this particular case since neutron can't use it so it's slightly different than the os-brick situation. We have to reason about what two different code paths will do. On Aug 29, 2016 6:41 AM, "Sean Dague" <sean at dague.net> wrote: > On 08/29/2016 08:29 AM, Kevin Benton wrote: > > Sort of. The neutron agent code doesn't use os-vif because the os-vif > > devs indicated that neutron's vif plugging code wasn't a use case they > > cared about [1]. > > > > So if we did generalize os-vif to work with the neutron agents then it > > would be two calling the same locked code. But at this point it's just > > two versions of similar logic trying to do the same thing. > > > > 1. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/284209/ > > Calling the same locked code wouldn't help, these are different services > that in *almost* all real deployments are running under different user > ids. Which means shared locks between them are basically not possible. > > -Sean > > -- > Sean Dague > http://dague.net > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160829/d045d1c0/attachment.html>