Re: [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH 4/5] tests/i44fx-test: No need for zeroing memory before memset

[Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>]

On 08/10/15 22:24, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 10/08/15 21:35, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> Change a g_malloc0 into g_malloc since the following
>> memset fills the whole buffer anyway.
>>
>> Cc: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  tests/i440fx-test.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/i440fx-test.c b/tests/i440fx-test.c
>> index d0bc8de..7fa1709 100644
>> --- a/tests/i440fx-test.c
>> +++ b/tests/i440fx-test.c
>> @@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ static void write_area(uint32_t start, uint32_t end, uint8_t value)
>>      uint32_t size = end - start + 1;
>>      uint8_t *data;
>>  
>> -    data = g_malloc0(size);
>> +    data = g_malloc(size);
>>      memset(data, value, size);
>>      memwrite(start, data, size);
>>  
>>
> 
> Technically you are right of course, but I remember some historical mess
> around this, in this file.
> 
> Plus I vaguely recall g_new[0]() being the most recent preference.
> 
> https://developer.gnome.org/glib/stable/glib-Memory-Allocation.html#g-new
> 
> See e.g. commit 97f3ad3551. Markus?

g_new IMHO only makes sense when you try to allocate the memory for a
struct or something similar - for allocating byte arrays, g_malloc is
the better choice. So I think this patch should be fine.

 Thomas