On 12/20/2013 05:47 PM, Pradipta Kumar Banerjee wrote:
[snip]
for (i = 0; i < *nparams; i++) {
virNodeCPUStatsPtr param = ¶ms[i];
What about this?
diff --git a/src/nodeinfo.c b/src/nodeinfo.c
index 1838547..aa1ad81 100644
--- a/src/nodeinfo.c
+++ b/src/nodeinfo.c
@@ -637,8 +637,9 @@ linuxNodeGetCPUStats(FILE *procstat,
while (fgets(line, sizeof(line), procstat) != NULL) {
char *buf = line;
+ char **buf_header = virStringSplit(buf, " ", 2);
- if (STRPREFIX(buf, cpu_header)) { /* aka logical CPU time */
+ if (STREQ(buf_header[0], cpu_header)) { /* aka logical CPU time */
size_t i;
if (sscanf(buf,
@@ -697,6 +698,7 @@ linuxNodeGetCPUStats(FILE *procstat,
ret = 0;
goto cleanup;
}
+ virStringFreeList(buf_header);
}
virReportInvalidArg(cpuNum,
This is definitely better and lesser amount of code..
I think the version with virStringSplit would need some fine tuning since in its
current form it will not free the memory for the failure cases..Comments ?
Good point.
We should add virStringFreeList(buf_header) to cleanup.
Also can some expert here provide some tips on whether in this particular
circumstance it should be fine to allocate/realloc/free memory inside the while
loop. Would be very helpful..
I think putting allocate/free memory inside the while is OK for me.
Because we must loop for searching the expected line,the times of loop
depends on the content of /proc/stat.
However, as you said, we better get some advise from the experts here.
Thanks,
Pradipta
Thanks
--
1.8.3.1
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
--
Best Regards,
Bing Bu Cao
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list