From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=45691 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PKoHO-0006sF-8q
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 03:31:11 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1PKoHN-00080j-Fx
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 03:31:10 -0500
Received: from mail-qy0-f180.google.com ([209.85.216.180]:53788)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1PKoHN-00080X-De
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 03:31:09 -0500
Received: by qyk29 with SMTP id 29so1964170qyk.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 00:31:08 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4CEB7BCA.5030001@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 09:31:06 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20101122101536.2B09BF90AF@ochil.suse.de>	<AANLkTin85oLpJrj5+BM09e=zedxAvU-e-cusmyP49u4j@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CEB7778.4010900@suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <4CEB7778.4010900@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] scsi: Implement alloc_req_iov callback
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.nongnu.org/archive/html/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: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, nab@linux-iscsi.org, kraxel@redhat.com

On 11/23/2010 09:12 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> qemu-malloc.c has:
>
> void qemu_free(void *ptr)
> {
>      trace_qemu_free(ptr);
>      free(ptr);
> }
>
>
> and 'free' doesn't normally do an error checking on the argument.
> Am I missing something?

It's not error checking: from free(3),

free() frees the memory space pointed to by ptr, which must have been 
returned by a previous call to malloc(), calloc() or realloc(). 
Otherwise, or if free(ptr) has already been called before, undefined 
behavior occurs. If ptr is NULL, no operation is performed.

Which means, that unless ptr is so often NULL that there is a measurable 
overhead from the call (unlikely in any case, not just this one) the 
"if" is actually going to be done by "free", and thus causing actually 
worse performance.

Not that man pages are always right, but in this case they agree with 
POSIX. :)

Paolo