From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:46618)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1QtlSQ-0000nC-Rj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 15:07:19 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1QtlSQ-0004U2-3p
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 15:07:18 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45468)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1QtlSP-0004Tt-Sy
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 15:07:18 -0400
Message-ID: <4E4C1161.3010205@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 12:07:13 -0700
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1313513145-5348-1-git-send-email-rth@twiddle.net>
	<1313513145-5348-3-git-send-email-rth@twiddle.net>
	<4E4BC5FA.1020409@redhat.com>
	<CAAu8pHtsS4xE1m0XH=RR=j-Uv_4sLB0Qxxj_WCoGXiYLUaumsQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAu8pHtsS4xE1m0XH=RR=j-Uv_4sLB0Qxxj_WCoGXiYLUaumsQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 02/14] isa: Add
	isa_register_old_portio_list().
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>

On 08/17/2011 10:23 AM, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >
> >>  +        }
> >>  +
> >>  +        ops = g_new(MemoryRegionOps, 1);
> >
> >
> >  g_new0(), we rely on initialized memory here
>
> Please avoid g_new/g_malloc until they are taught to use qemu_malloc
> or was it the other way around.
>

Why?

-- 
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.