qemu-trivial
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH] migration: Fix compiler warning ('caps' may b


From: Michael Tokarev
Subject: Re: [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH] migration: Fix compiler warning ('caps' may be used uninitialized)
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 00:13:52 +0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130922 Icedove/17.0.9

29.09.2013 19:41, Stefan Weil wrote:
The QEMU buildbot default_i386_debian_6_0 shows this warning:

   CC    migration.o
migration.c: In function 'qmp_query_migrate_capabilities':
migration.c:149: warning:
  'caps' may be used uninitialized in this function

Gah, how disgusting.  The code is correct, yet gcc complains
needlessly...

While changing this code, I also replaced g_malloc0
by the type safe g_new0.

Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil <address@hidden>
---

Buildbot URL:
http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/qemu/builders/default_i386_debian_6_0/builds/775/steps/compile/logs/stdio

  migration.c |   12 +++++-------
  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/migration.c b/migration.c
index 200d404..8dcb6ce 100644
--- a/migration.c
+++ b/migration.c
@@ -145,17 +145,15 @@ uint64_t migrate_max_downtime(void)

  MigrationCapabilityStatusList *qmp_query_migrate_capabilities(Error **errp)
  {
-    MigrationCapabilityStatusList *head = NULL;
-    MigrationCapabilityStatusList *caps;
+    MigrationCapabilityStatusList *head =
+        g_new0(MigrationCapabilityStatusList, 1);
+    MigrationCapabilityStatusList *caps = head;
      MigrationState *s = migrate_get_current();
      int i;

      for (i = 0; i < MIGRATION_CAPABILITY_MAX; i++) {
-        if (head == NULL) {
-            head = g_malloc0(sizeof(*caps));
-            caps = head;
-        } else {
-            caps->next = g_malloc0(sizeof(*caps));
+        if (i > 0) {
+            caps->next = g_new0(MigrationCapabilityStatusList, i);
              caps = caps->next;
          }

But this assumes that MIGRATION_CAPABILITY_MAX > 0 ! ;)
Ie, that there's at least one entry (head) in the list.
Do we care?

Previous code was more natural, so to say...

I'd just initialize `caps' to the same NULL as `head'
initially...  Or maybe change for() into do..while()..
Dunno, somehow I don't like the new code much, either ;)

Thanks,

/mjt



reply via email to

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