On 10.02.2016 12:50, John Ferlan wrote:
On 02/10/2016 06:37 AM, Erik Skultety wrote:
> On 10/02/16 12:02, John Ferlan wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 02/10/2016 05:37 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>>> The function, like others in our code, returns zero on success
>>> and a negative value on error. However, there are two places in
>>> xenconfig source code where we check for non-zero value. While
>>> the function can't currently return a positive value, those
>>> checks look okay, but does not really follow our style.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn(a)redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>> src/xenconfig/xen_sxpr.c | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>> I have patches on list which are similar, but I've been requested to
>> change. In particular, this change leads to a memory leak. as the vnc
>> needs to be deleted.
>>
>> John
>
> Hmm, I can't see any memory leak caused by this particular patch, could
> you please point it out for me? The only thing that could possibly leak
> by an error within virDomainGraphicsListenAddress, is graphics and that
> pointer is properly freed at the end.
>
> Erik
>
Michal asked me via IRC - the code looked eerily similar to the
qemu_command code I had posted patches on which also has the same non
status check. Should have more coffee in my system before diving in ;-)
John
Okay, since we have a clear consensus here, I've pushed this one now.
Michal