Kamil Rytarowski <n...@gmx.com> writes:
> On 06.02.2020 14:09, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 2:06 PM Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> Kamil Rytarowski <n...@gmx.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 03.02.2020 12:54, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>>>>> @@ -2029,6 +2072,19 @@ static void qemu_whpx_start_vcpu(CPUState *cpu)
>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +static void qemu_nvmm_start_vcpu(CPUState *cpu)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + char thread_name[VCPU_THREAD_NAME_SIZE];
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu->thread = g_malloc0(sizeof(QemuThread));
>>>>>> + cpu->halt_cond = g_malloc0(sizeof(QemuCond));
>>>>>
>>>>> Nitpick, we prefer g_new0().
>>>>
>>>> In this file other qemu_*_start_vcpu() use g_malloc0().
>>>>
>>>> I will leave this part unchanged and defer tor future style fixups if
>>>> someone is interested.
>>>
>>> Time to re-run Coccinelle with the semantic patch from commit
>>> b45c03f585e.
>>
>> I thought about it, but then noticed it would be clever to modify
>> checkpatch to refuse 'g_malloc0?(.*sizeof.*);'
>>
>>
>
> As the patchset was reviewed, could we please merge it in the current
> (v3) form (*) please?
No objection. If I wanted you to clean this up before we accept your
work, I would've told you :)
[...]
