On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 07/25/2011 01:04 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> >> On 25.07.2011, at 12:02, Avi Kivity wrote: >> >> > On 07/25/2011 12:56 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> >> > >> >> > That argument can be used to block any change. You'll get used to >> >> it in time. The question is, is the new interface better or not. >> >> >> >> I agree that it keeps you from accidently malloc'ing a struct of >> >> pointer size. But couldn't we also just add this to checkpatch.pl? >> > >> > Better APIs trump better patch review. >> >> Only if you enforce them. The only sensible thing for QEMU_NEW (despite >> the general rule of upper case macros, I'd actually prefer this one to be >> lower case though since it's so often used) would be to remove qemu_malloc, >> declare malloc() as unusable and convert all users of qemu_malloc() to >> qemu_new(). > > Some qemu_mallocs() will remain (allocating a byte array or something > variable sized). > > I agree qemu_new() will be nicer, but that will have to wait until Blue is > several light-days away from Earth. There is no escape. Don't make me destroy you. You cannot hide forever, Luke. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
