On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 02:56:36PM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 15:05:18 +0100, Erik Skultety wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 04:48:26PM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote:
We'd free only the first element of the vector leaking the rest.
Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa <pkrempa@redhat.com> --- src/util/viralloc.h | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/src/util/viralloc.h b/src/util/viralloc.h index 15451d4673..572b7d1c1c 100644 --- a/src/util/viralloc.h +++ b/src/util/viralloc.h @@ -650,6 +650,9 @@ void virAllocTestHook(void (*func)(int, void*), void *data); * the variable declared with it by calling the function * defined by VIR_DEFINE_AUTOPTR_FUNC when the variable * goes out of scope. + * + * Note that this macro must NOT be used with vectors! The cleaning function + * will not free any elements beyond the first.
s/cleaning/freeing/
I understand, but if you have happen to have a dedicated list type, then you'd have a dedicated destructor, so both of these would be okay with vectors. On
Note that the function registered via __attribute(cleanup ... gets only the pointer to the stack'd variable as an argument. This means that you can do only 'value-terminated' (NULL, -1, ... ) lists.
Anything requiring count of elements will need to be encapsulated in a struct which makes it a container. Thus the comment does not apply.
Yeah, true. Erik