From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 11/19] Implement qmp and hmp commands for
 notification lists
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 14:15:12 +0200
Message-ID: <20121023121512.GD19977@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
References: <1348226255-4226-1-git-send-email-vasilis.liaskovitis@profitbricks.com>
 <1348226255-4226-12-git-send-email-vasilis.liaskovitis@profitbricks.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, seabios@seabios.org,
	avi@redhat.com, anthony@codemonkey.ws, kevin@koconnor.net,
	wency@cn.fujitsu.com, kraxel@redhat.com, eblake@redhat.com,
	blauwirbel@gmail.com, gleb@redhat.com, imammedo@redhat.com
To: Vasilis Liaskovitis <vasilis.liaskovitis@profitbricks.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-bk0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:54425 "EHLO
	mail-bk0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1754251Ab2JWMPQ (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 23 Oct 2012 08:15:16 -0400
Received: by mail-bk0-f46.google.com with SMTP id jk13so1522370bkc.19
        for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 05:15:15 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1348226255-4226-12-git-send-email-vasilis.liaskovitis@profitbricks.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 01:17:27PM +0200, Vasilis Liaskovitis wrote:
> +MemHpInfoList *qmp_query_memory_hotplug(Error **errp)
> +{
> +    DimmBus *bus = main_memory_bus;
> +    MemHpInfoList *head = NULL, *cur_item = NULL, *info;
> +    struct dimm_hp_result *item, *nextitem;
> +
> +    QTAILQ_FOREACH_SAFE(item, &bus->dimm_hp_result_queue, next, nextitem) {
> +
> +        info = g_malloc0(sizeof(*info));
> +        info->value = g_malloc0(sizeof(*info->value));
> +        info->value->dimm = g_malloc0(sizeof(char) * 32);
> +        info->value->request = g_malloc0(sizeof(char) * 16);
> +        info->value->result = g_malloc0(sizeof(char) * 16);
> +        switch (item->ret) {
> +            case DIMM_REMOVE_SUCCESS:
> +                strcpy(info->value->request, "hot-remove");
> +                strcpy(info->value->result, "success");
> +                break;
> +            case DIMM_REMOVE_FAIL:
> +                strcpy(info->value->request, "hot-remove");
> +                strcpy(info->value->result, "failure");
> +                break;
> +            case DIMM_ADD_SUCCESS:
> +                strcpy(info->value->request, "hot-add");
> +                strcpy(info->value->result, "success");
> +                break;
> +            case DIMM_ADD_FAIL:
> +                strcpy(info->value->request, "hot-add");
> +                strcpy(info->value->result, "failure");
> +                break;
> +            default:
> +                break;    
> +        }

Any reason to use fixed-size malloc + strcpy() instead of just
info->value->X = g_strdup("foo")?

Stefan