[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] trivial fix of malloc to g_new in thunk
From: |
Stefan Hajnoczi |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] trivial fix of malloc to g_new in thunk |
Date: |
Fri, 1 Mar 2019 16:44:05 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) |
On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:16:57PM +0530, Aarushi Mehta wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Aarushi Mehta <address@hidden>
> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>
>
> Note that since thunking occurs throughout the lifetime of the QEMU
> instance, there is no matching 'free' to correct.
>
> ---
Hi Aarushi,
The following formatting is commonly used:
Subject: [PATCH v3] thunk: fix of malloc to g_new
Note that since thunking occurs throughout the lifetime of the QEMU
instance, there is no matching 'free' to correct.
Signed-off-by: Aarushi Mehta <address@hidden>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>
I changed the subject to include the prefix of the component being
modified. You can look up the preferred prefix using "git log thunk.c"
to see what other commits have used.
The Signed-off-by: goes at the bottom of the commit description.
Don't worry if it takes a few tries to get the formatting conventions.
There is scripts/checkpatch.pl for scanning patches for coding style
violations but I think it wouldn't have detected these things.
The code change itself looks good:
Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <address@hidden>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] trivial fix of malloc to g_new in thunk,
Stefan Hajnoczi <=