From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NHhBG-0007nD-Qj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2009 12:15:26 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NHhBB-0007iq-Cd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2009 12:15:25 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45368 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NHhBB-0007iW-6z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2009 12:15:21 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:18664) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NHhBB-0004LU-Fw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2009 12:15:21 -0500 Message-ID: <4B1D37D2.3010707@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 19:13:54 +0200 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Permit zero-sized qemu_malloc() & friends References: <4B1D2462.3070000@codemonkey.ws> <4B1D2696.5080003@redhat.com> <4B1D27EE.7060400@codemonkey.ws> <4B1D292D.4010700@redhat.com> <4B1D2B54.40402@codemonkey.ws> <4B1D2CC2.7010806@redhat.com> <4B1D2E2E.6060907@codemonkey.ws> <4B1D2F38.1040604@redhat.com> <4B1D347A.3030102@codemonkey.ws> <4B1D363A.5020200@redhat.com> <4B1D36BE.9020801@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4B1D36BE.9020801@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: Kevin Wolf , Paul Brook , Markus Armbruster , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 12/07/2009 07:09 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Avi Kivity wrote: >> On 12/07/2009 06:59 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >>> Avi Kivity wrote: >>>> What about developers that hit the assert? Do they send patches >>>> that fix code that works in production just so they can run in >>>> developer mode? >>> >>> Sounds like a good way to get developers to help convert from >>> qemu_malloc() to qemu_new*() :-) >>> >> >> In 0.12? >> >> My objection was to different behaviour of 0.12 in dev and production >> modes. > > It's a temporary problem that hopefully will be addressed quickly in > the 0.13 cycle. > I don't understand. People will develop patches for 0.12 for a while as bugs are reported and fixed. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function