Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Permit zero-sized qemu_malloc() & friends

[Avi Kivity]

On 12/07/2009 06:06 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 12/07/2009 05:50 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > > While it's always fun to argue about standards interpretation, I 
> > > wanted to capture some action items from the discussion that I think 
> > > there is agreement about.  Since I want to make changes for 0.12, I 
> > > think it would be best to try and settle these now so we can do this 
> > > before -rc2.
> > >
> > > For 0.12.0-rc2:
> > >
> > > I will send out a patch tonight or tomorrow changing qemu_malloc() 
> > > to return malloc(1) when size=0 only for production builds (via 
> > > --enable-zero-mallocs).  Development trees will maintain their 
> > > current behavior.
> >
> > Since active development is ceasing on 0.12, I'd suggest not having 
> > separate behaviour for devel and production.  Do we want patches for 
> > n==0 array allocations at this time?
>
> Covering every qemu_malloc instance this close to the GA is too 
> risky.  I agree that having separate behavior is less than ideal but I 
> think it's the only sane way forward.

I don't understand why.  What's so insane about Markus' patch?  Allowing 
size=0 for both developer and production builds?

It seems like the least risky, least change approach to me.  Exactly 
what we want for 0.12.

> > I'd really like to see Markus' patch applied.
>
> For 0.12, that doesn't seem like a possibility.

Please explain why.

> > In addition, Markus' patch should be applied to master to avoid 
> > regressions while the code is converted.
>
> Let's separate that discussion as it's an independent consideration.

I've asked for address@hidden to be created for 
this purpose.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function