On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 at 11:54, Erik Skultety <eskultet@redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:18:07PM +0530, Sukrit Bhatnagar wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 at 18:39, Erik Skultety <eskultet@redhat.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 05:36:47PM +0530, Sukrit Bhatnagar wrote:
By making use of GNU C's cleanup attribute handled by the VIR_AUTOFREE macro for declaring scalar variables, majority of the VIR_FREE calls can be dropped, which in turn leads to getting rid of most of our cleanup sections.
Signed-off-by: Sukrit Bhatnagar <skrtbhtngr@gmail.com> --- src/util/virfirewall.c | 16 +++++----------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/util/virfirewall.c b/src/util/virfirewall.c index dfd792f..b4a4d06 100644 --- a/src/util/virfirewall.c +++ b/src/util/virfirewall.c @@ -511,7 +511,7 @@ void virFirewallRuleAddArgFormat(virFirewallPtr firewall, virFirewallRulePtr rule, const char *fmt, ...) { - char *arg; + VIR_AUTOFREE(char *) arg = NULL; va_list list;
VIR_FIREWALL_RULE_RETURN_IF_ERROR(firewall, rule); @@ -525,13 +525,11 @@ void virFirewallRuleAddArgFormat(virFirewallPtr firewall,
va_end(list);
- VIR_FREE(arg); return;
no_memory: firewall->err = ENOMEM; va_end(list); - VIR_FREE(arg);
There could be an additional patch replacing the no_memory label with 'cleanup' with the obvious adjustments.
There are many functions in virfirewall.c where no_memory is used instead of cleanup. So I should change either all of them, or none of them.
Yep, so it should be all of them.
Also, according to libvirt hacking page, no_memory is a standard label [1]. Should we replace it then? [1]: https://libvirt.org/hacking.html#goto