From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57718) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XGjtG-0004cj-3M for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 03:19:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XGjt9-0006Pq-JC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 03:19:34 -0400 Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.66]:33459) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XGjt8-0006Lq-SI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 03:19:27 -0400 Message-ID: <53E86E35.6060802@huawei.com> Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 15:18:13 +0800 From: zhanghailiang MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1407489672-12212-1-git-send-email-zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com> <1407489672-12212-7-git-send-email-zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com> <87mwbfjotv.fsf@linaro.org> <53E4AA1B.3090902@huawei.com> <87y4uzun66.fsf@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <87y4uzun66.fsf@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 06/10] slirp/misc: check return value of malloc() List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?UTF-8?B?QWxleCBCZW5uw6ll?= Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, lkurusa@redhat.com, mst@redhat.com, jan.kiszka@siemens.com, riku.voipio@iki.fi, mjt@tls.msk.ru, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, lcapitulino@redhat.com, stefanha@redhat.com, luonengjun@huawei.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, peter.huangpeng@huawei.com, rth@twiddle.net On 2014/8/8 21:24, Alex Bennée wrote: > > zhanghailiang writes: > >> On 2014/8/8 17:43, Alex Bennée wrote: >>> >>> zhanghailiang writes: >>> >>>> Signed-off-by: zhanghailiang >>>> --- >>>> slirp/misc.c | 9 +++++++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> > >>> >>> Your indenting has gone a bit weird there. >> >> Hmm, this file has some places that use tab key as indent. >> Here i used spaces as indent, otherwise the patch can not pass the check >> of '/scripts/checkpatch.pl'. >> >> What's your opinion? Use tab as what it does? Thanks! > > Welcome to the world of QEMU's inconsistent whitespace ;-) > > You have two choices: > > * two patches: 1st to clean up whitespace for that function, 2nd to > fix > * keep to using tabs for that particular fix > > Eventually the code base will get to a consistent state we hope... > OK, I will choose the second way! Thanks, Alex. >>>> (*ex_ptr)->ex_fport = port; >>>> (*ex_ptr)->ex_addr = addr; >>>> (*ex_ptr)->ex_pty = do_pty; >>>> @@ -236,8 +240,9 @@ strdup(str) >>>> char *bptr; >>>> >>>> bptr = (char *)malloc(strlen(str)+1); >>>> - strcpy(bptr, str); >>>> - >>>> + if (bptr) { >>>> + strcpy(bptr, str); >>>> + } >>>> return bptr; >>>> } >>>> #endif >>> >>> Again use of g_malloc would remove the need for this. HACKING section 3 >>> says: >>> >> >> OK, Thanks! >> >>> 3. Low level memory management >>> >>> Use of the malloc/free/realloc/calloc/valloc/memalign/posix_memalign >>> APIs is not allowed in the QEMU codebase. Instead of these routines, >>> use the GLib memory allocation routines g_malloc/g_malloc0/g_new/ >>> g_new0/g_realloc/g_free or QEMU's qemu_memalign/qemu_blockalign/qemu_vfree >>> APIs. >>> >>> Please note that g_malloc will exit on allocation failure, so there >>> is no need to test for failure (as you would have to with malloc). >>> Calling g_malloc with a zero size is valid and will return NULL. >>> >>> >