From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1M9y2P-0000Wa-Vf
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2009 05:06:06 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1M9y2K-0000ML-N4
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2009 05:06:05 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52301 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M9y2K-0000M2-Id
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2009 05:06:00 -0400
Received: from mail-ew0-f213.google.com ([209.85.219.213]:60992)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1M9y2J-0007mi-RM
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2009 05:06:00 -0400
Received: by ewy9 with SMTP id 9so5595899ewy.34
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Fri, 29 May 2009 02:05:58 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4A1FA573.4010602@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 04:05:55 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] use qemu_malloc and friends consistently
References: <200905290758.11551.jcd@tribudubois.net>
	<4A1F9FFE.3030100@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A1F9FFE.3030100@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Jean-Christophe Dubois <jcd@tribudubois.net>

Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Since recently qemu_malloc behaves differently from malloc with size =
> 0. This isn't allowed any more with qemu_malloc. So you need to check
> for pattern_count == 0 and either print an error message or malloc a
> different size, e.g. 1. I'm sure we don't want qemu-io to abort() in
> such a case.
>
> Or we could start over with a lengthy discussion about fixing qemu_malloc...
>   

Having qemu_malloc(0) abort is silly.  Returning NULL or returning
malloc(1) are both reasonable options.

Putting the abort() in there is going to introduce a ton of subtle bugs,
I vote for changing qemu_malloc() to have a sane behavior.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> Kevin
>
>
>