2011/7/27 Osier Yang <jyang@redhat.com>:
Hello, there
Per bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725322, should we change the remoteDomainSet* functions into "skipgen", and fix the leaks like below? (NB, new VIR_FREE statements)
Why not fix the generator instead?
static int remoteDomainSetBlkioParameters(virDomainPtr dom, virTypedParameterPtr params, int nparams, unsigned int flags) { int rv = -1; int i; struct private_data *priv = dom->conn->privateData; remote_domain_set_blkio_parameters_args args; remote_domain_set_blkio_parameters_args args;
remoteDriverLock(priv);
make_nonnull_domain(&args.dom, dom); args.flags = flags;
if (remoteSerializeTypedParameters(params, nparams, &args.params.params_val, &args.params.params_len) < 0) { for (i = 0; i < nparams; i++) { VIR_FREE(args.params.params_val[i].field); } VIR_FREE(args.params.params_val);
This loop should not be needed as remoteSerializeTypedParameters cleans up in the error case.
xdr_free((xdrproc_t)xdr_remote_domain_set_blkio_parameters_args, (char *)&args); goto done; }
if (call(dom->conn, priv, 0, REMOTE_PROC_DOMAIN_SET_BLKIO_PARAMETERS, (xdrproc_t)xdr_remote_domain_set_blkio_parameters_args, (char *)&args, (xdrproc_t)xdr_void, (char *)NULL) == -1) { goto done; }
rv = 0;
done: if (args.params.params_val) { for (i = 0; i < nparams; i++) { VIR_FREE(args.params.params_val[i].field); } VIR_FREE(args.params.params_val); } remoteDriverUnlock(priv); return rv; }
This can be fixed in the generator, but why no use xdr_free here instead of open coding the free loop? -- Matthias Bolte http://photron.blogspot.com