From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1L3aMQ-0006zr-5E
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:04:06 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1L3aMO-0006yw-GZ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:04:05 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38348 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L3aMO-0006ys-8X
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:04:04 -0500
Received: from ey-out-1920.google.com ([74.125.78.144]:49719)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1L3aMN-0003F9-VW
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:04:04 -0500
Received: by ey-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 4so451367eyk.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:04:02 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4926F80D.30401@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:03:57 -0600
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2 of 5] [UPDATE] implementing qemu_reallocz
References: <4926EAD3.6020507@eu.citrix.com>
In-Reply-To: <4926EAD3.6020507@eu.citrix.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> Adding a qemu_reallocz implementation.
>
> +void *qemu_reallocz(void *ptr, size_t size)
> +{
> +    void *res;
> +    res = realloc(ptr, size);
> +    if (!res)
> +        return NULL;
> +    memset(res, 0, size);
> +    return res;
> +}
> +
>   

I think this interface is pretty non-intuitive.  My first expectation is 
that only the grown region would be zero'd, not the whole thing.

In general, if you don't care about the old memory, free()/malloc() 
would be a better combination.  You're just doing extra work by using 
realloc() here.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>  char *qemu_strdup(const char *str)
>  {
>      char *ptr;
>
>
>