[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] Support for UDP unicast network backend
From: |
Stefan Hajnoczi |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] Support for UDP unicast network backend |
Date: |
Tue, 29 Nov 2011 09:47:40 +0000 |
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Benjamin <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 11/28/11 20:39, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Benjamin<address@hidden> wrote:
>>>
>>> + fd = qemu_socket(PF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM, 0);
>>> + if (fd< 0) {
>>> + perror("socket(PF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM)");
>>> + return -1;
>>> + }
>>> + val = 1;
>>> + ret = setsockopt(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR,
>>> + (const char *)&val, sizeof(val));
>>> + if (ret< 0) {
>>> + perror("setsockopt(SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR)");
>>
>>
>> Please avoid leaking the file descriptor on error:
>> closesocket(fd);
>>
>> Since existing code also does this it may be more appropriate to send
>> a follow-up patch that cleans up all of net/socket.c.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi<address@hidden>
>>
>> Stefan
>
>
> I can do that. However is it really a leak considering the fact that
> the program will call exit just after?
> If it's a matter of consistency and coding style I would understand
> though.
net/socket.c should not make assumptions about the main program
exiting after an error. NICs can be added at runtime using netdev_add
and that should not leak file descriptors.
> One more thing, git-format-patch added a "From" field to the header and
> caused this glitch in the mail. I thought git-send-mail or the mail
> server would handle it well but apparently not:
>
> From 2f5b85fcadcfee3b75a6a21dc86d10b945c99f0f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Benjamin MARSILI <address@hidden>
>
> git-am didn't complain with the patch that I sent but it may break after
> gmail relayed it
> (http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2011-11/msg03152.html).
> The second from header is interpreted as text... Should I remove the
> first "From" field before sending the patch?
This is normal and is not a problem. Your git commit is authored by
Benjamin MARSILI <address@hidden> but you sent the mail from
Benjamin <address@hidden>.
git-am will apply the patch with Benjamin MARSILI
<address@hidden> as the author and it will forget about Benjamin
<address@hidden>. This is usually what you want - it let's you
credit commits to other people but send the patch emails on their
behalf.
Stefan