On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 5:53 PM Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 03:47:03PM +0200, Mahmoud Mandour wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 3:25 PM Mahmoud Mandour <ma.mando...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Replaced allocations done using malloc(), calloc(), and realloc() > > > to their equivalent functions in GLib. > > > > > > Memory that is allocated locally and freed when the function exits > > > are annotated g_autofree so that the deallocation is automatically > > > handled. Subsequently, I could remove a bunch of free() calls. > > > > > > Also, tried to keep the semantics of the code as is, but when the > > > allocation is a small one, or a crucial one, I replaced the > > > NULL-checking mechanisms with glib's functions that crash on error. > > > > > > This is related to a patch that I had submitted as a part of a > > > previous series. The previous patch had some errors. Also, I thought > > > that it's better to split the patch into smaller pieces. > > > > > > The previous patch can be found here: > > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-03/msg05153.html > > > > > > Mahmoud Mandour (8): > > > virtiofsd: Changed allocations of fuse_req to GLib functions > > > virtiofds: Changed allocations of iovec to GLib's functions > > > virtiofsd: Changed fuse_pollhandle allocation to GLib's functions > > > virtiofsd: Changed allocations of fuse_session to GLib's functions > > > virtiofsd: Changed allocation of lo_map_elems to GLib's functions > > > virtiofsd: Changed allocations of fv_VuDev & its internals to GLib > > > functions > > > virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c: Changed local allocations to GLib > > > functions > > > virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c: Changed allocations of locals to GLib > > > > > > tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c | 43 +++++++++++--------------------- > > > tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c | 34 ++++++++----------------- > > > tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c | 21 ++++++---------- > > > 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-) > > > > > > -- > > > 2.25.1 > > > > > > > > Hello, > > For some reason, my get_maintainers script auto cc-filling did not work, > so > > I had to manually cc > > you. > > Sorry for the inconvenience. > > Thanks, will review tomorrow. > > Stefan > Hello I wanted to ask whether I need to resend the patch series with updates utilizing the feedback I got? There are patches that are overall superfluous, and others are "reviewed". Should I resend an updated series with only the patches reviewed? Yours, Mahmoud
