Re: [PATCH 11/25] network: use g_free() in place of remaining VIR_FREE()
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 23:34:00 -0400, Laine Stump wrote:
Signed-off-by: Laine Stump <laine(a)redhat.com>
---
src/network/bridge_driver.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------
1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/network/bridge_driver.c b/src/network/bridge_driver.c
index 668aa9ca88..a1b2f5b6c7 100644
--- a/src/network/bridge_driver.c
+++ b/src/network/bridge_driver.c
[...]
@@ -706,7 +706,8 @@ networkStateInitialize(bool privileged,
network_driver->lockFD = -1;
if (virMutexInit(&network_driver->lock) < 0) {
- VIR_FREE(network_driver);
+ g_free(network_driver);
+ network_driver = NULL;
goto error;
In general I'm agains senseless replacement of VIR_FREE for g_free.
There is IMO no value to do so. VIR_FREE is now implemented via
g_clear_pointer(&ptr, g_free) so g_free is actually used.
Mass replacements are also substrate for adding bugs and need to be
approached carefully, so doing this en-mass might lead to others
attempting the same with possibly less care.
In general, mass replacements should be done only to
g_clear_pointer(&ptr, g_free)
and I'm not sure it's worth it.