From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Np0Wr-0006pi-NZ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2010 09:35:27 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44128 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Np0Wp-0006oB-Pr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2010 09:35:23 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim
	4.60) (envelope-from <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>)
	id 1Np0Wn-0007xn-75
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2010 09:35:23 -0500
Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:7198)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>)
	id 1Np0Wm-0007wn-Hq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2010 09:35:20 -0500
Received: from e28smtp09.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.9])
	by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>) id 1Np0Wi-0002o7-3L
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2010 09:35:16 -0500
Received: from d28relay05.in.ibm.com (d28relay05.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.62])
	by e28smtp09.in.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o29DrJvC009476
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 9 Mar 2010 19:23:19 +0530
Received: from d28av05.in.ibm.com (d28av05.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.67])
	by d28relay05.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id
	o29EZ4bH1593578
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 9 Mar 2010 20:05:05 +0530
Received: from d28av05.in.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1])
	by d28av05.in.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id
	o29EZ4SS016973
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 10 Mar 2010 01:35:04 +1100
From: "Aneesh Kumar K. V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 04/17] virtio-9p: Implement P9_TSTAT
In-Reply-To: <201003091230.08628.paul@codesourcery.com>
References: <1267642874-15001-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com>
	<87vddcjhpv.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<4B95AD93.1070502@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<201003091230.08628.paul@codesourcery.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:05:02 +0530
Message-ID: <878wa136nd.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
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: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, jvrao <jvrao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>

On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 12:30:08 +0000, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> > Is  there any reason (other than being coding style) in using qemu_free()
> > instead of free()? As per qem-malloc.c qemu_free() is nothing but free().
> 
> The whole point of qemu_{malloc,free} is to isolate code from the system 
> implementation of malloc/free. It's entirely possible that future versions of 
> qemu_malloc will use a different memory allocation strategy.
> 
> > The reason I am asking is.. tracking string allocs become tricky
> > if some of them were defined using qemu_alloc() and others are allocated
> >  through sprintf().
> 
> sprintf does not allocate memory.
> If you mean strdup, then you shouldn't be using that (use qemu_strdup).

we have code that does

static void v9fs_string_sprintf(V9fsString *str, const char *fmt, ...)
{
    va_list ap;
    int err;

    v9fs_string_free(str);

    va_start(ap, fmt);
    err = vasprintf(&str->data, fmt, ap);
    BUG_ON(err == -1);
    va_end(ap);

    str->size = err;
}


I guess we should not be using vasprint. What alternatives are
available today ?

-aneesh