From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NHFOr-0001TB-Uk
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 06 Dec 2009 06:35:38 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NHFOl-0001Qz-QD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 06 Dec 2009 06:35:35 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47581 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NHFOl-0001Qj-Ix
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 06 Dec 2009 06:35:31 -0500
Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:43406)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <gceq-qemu-devel@m.gmane.org>)
	id 1NHFOl-0002dd-8s
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 06 Dec 2009 06:35:31 -0500
Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1NHFOh-00025r-NG
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:35:27 +0100
Received: from 85.93.118.17 ([85.93.118.17])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
	id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:35:27 +0100
Received: from pbonzini by 85.93.118.17 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
	id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:35:27 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:35:04 +0100
Message-ID: <hfg4t8$9sm$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <m3skbwxgkp.fsf@crossbow.pond.sub.org>	<4B193DA5.6040507@codemonkey.ws>	<m3zl5x1q5x.fsf@crossbow.pond.sub.org>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0912051957430.3457@linmac.oyster.ru>	<m31vj8zg8s.fsf@crossbow.pond.sub.org>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0912061132190.8894@linmac.oyster.ru>	<m3bpicwk8r.fsf@crossbow.pond.sub.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0912061302550.9087@linmac.oyster.ru>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0912061302550.9087@linmac.oyster.ru>
Sender: news <news@ger.gmane.org>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] Permit zero-sized qemu_malloc() & friends
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: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 12/06/2009 11:22 AM, malc wrote:
> Here, i believe, you are inventing artificial restrictions on how
> malloc behaves, i don't see anything that prevents the implementor
> from setting aside a range of addresses with 31st bit set as an
> indicator of "zero" allocations, and then happily giving it to the
> user of malloc and consumming it in free.

But it has to make it a valid address anyway.  If a zero-sized read 
treats it as invalid (SIGSEGV, EFAULT, whatever), malloc has failed to 
return a valid address and is not obeying its specification.

Paolo