[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 04/17] virtio-9p: Implement P9_TSTAT

From: Aneesh Kumar K. V
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 04/17] virtio-9p: Implement P9_TSTAT
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:05:02 +0530

On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 12:30:08 +0000, Paul Brook <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Is  there any reason (other than being coding style) in using qemu_free()
> > instead of free()? As per qem-malloc.c qemu_free() is nothing but free().
> The whole point of qemu_{malloc,free} is to isolate code from the system 
> implementation of malloc/free. It's entirely possible that future versions of 
> qemu_malloc will use a different memory allocation strategy.
> > The reason I am asking is.. tracking string allocs become tricky
> > if some of them were defined using qemu_alloc() and others are allocated
> >  through sprintf().
> sprintf does not allocate memory.
> If you mean strdup, then you shouldn't be using that (use qemu_strdup).

we have code that does

static void v9fs_string_sprintf(V9fsString *str, const char *fmt, ...)
    va_list ap;
    int err;


    va_start(ap, fmt);
    err = vasprintf(&str->data, fmt, ap);
    BUG_ON(err == -1);

    str->size = err;

I guess we should not be using vasprint. What alternatives are
available today ?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]