[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7] slirp/misc: Use g_malloc() in
From: |
Jeff Cody |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7] slirp/misc: Use g_malloc() instead of malloc() |
Date: |
Mon, 18 Aug 2014 16:23:23 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 03:32:21PM +0400, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> 18.08.2014 11:51, zhanghailiang пишет:
> > Here we don't check the return value of malloc() which may fail.
> > Use the g_malloc() instead, which will abort the program when
> > there is not enough memory.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: zhanghailiang <address@hidden>
> > Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <address@hidden>
> > ---
> > slirp/misc.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/slirp/misc.c b/slirp/misc.c
> > index b8eb74c..f7fe497 100644
> > --- a/slirp/misc.c
> > +++ b/slirp/misc.c
> > @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ int add_exec(struct ex_list **ex_ptr, int do_pty, char
> > *exec,
> > }
> >
> > tmp_ptr = *ex_ptr;
> > - *ex_ptr = (struct ex_list *)malloc(sizeof(struct ex_list));
> > + *ex_ptr = (struct ex_list *)g_malloc(sizeof(struct ex_list));
>
> There's a convinient macro in glib, g_new(typename, numelts). Also
> there's a less commonly used g_renew() which is like realloc, but it
> is not applicable here.
>
If you are going to respin anyway, I recommend dropping the
superfluous (struct ex_list *) cast here as well.
> > (*ex_ptr)->ex_fport = port;
> > (*ex_ptr)->ex_addr = addr;
> > (*ex_ptr)->ex_pty = do_pty;
> > @@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ strdup(str)
> > {
> > char *bptr;
> >
> > - bptr = (char *)malloc(strlen(str)+1);
> > + bptr = (char *)g_malloc(strlen(str)+1);
> > strcpy(bptr, str);
> >
> > return bptr;
>
> Oh. And this one should be removed completely. It is a reimplementation
> of strdup() for system which lacks it. This code should go, we don't build
> on such a system anyway and we always have g_strdup(). There's one more
> usage of strdup() in this file, btw.
>
> I'm sorry for being so picky, and you're already at v7, but heck.. We should
> be more active at reviewing patches :)
>
> Thanks,
>
> /mjt
>