On 27/11/18 14:52, Greg Kurz wrote: > On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 14:41:53 +0100 > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> On 27/11/18 14:05, Greg Kurz wrote: >>> Because it is a recommended coding practice (see HACKING). >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <gr...@kaod.org> >>> --- >>> hw/ppc/ppc405_boards.c | 4 ++-- >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/ppc405_boards.c b/hw/ppc/ppc405_boards.c >>> index 3be3fe4432b4..f35b412c88dd 100644 >>> --- a/hw/ppc/ppc405_boards.c >>> +++ b/hw/ppc/ppc405_boards.c >>> @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ static void ref405ep_init(MachineState *machine) >>> MemoryRegion *bios; >>> MemoryRegion *sram = g_new(MemoryRegion, 1); >>> ram_addr_t bdloc; >>> - MemoryRegion *ram_memories = g_malloc(2 * sizeof(*ram_memories)); >>> + MemoryRegion *ram_memories = g_new(MemoryRegion, 2); >>> hwaddr ram_bases[2], ram_sizes[2]; >>> target_ulong sram_size; >>> long bios_size; >>> @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ static void taihu_405ep_init(MachineState *machine) >>> qemu_irq *pic; >>> MemoryRegion *sysmem = get_system_memory(); >>> MemoryRegion *bios; >>> - MemoryRegion *ram_memories = g_malloc(2 * sizeof(*ram_memories)); >>> + MemoryRegion *ram_memories = g_new(MemoryRegion, 2); >>> MemoryRegion *ram = g_malloc0(sizeof(*ram)); >> >> Why not change both lines here? >> >> MemoryRegion *ram = g_new0(MemoryRegion, 1); >> > > Because HACKING says: > > Declarations like T *v = g_malloc(sizeof(*v)) are acceptable, though.
Yes, I agree, but it is weird to have 2 similar lines and only change 1, for code consistency I'd change both... > > but if there's a consensus on fixing these as well, I'll happily do > it :) > >>> hwaddr ram_bases[2], ram_sizes[2]; >>> long bios_size; >>> >>> >
