diff mbox series

[v2,1/7] virtiofsd: Changed allocations of fuse_req to GLib functions

Message ID 20210420154643.58439-2-ma.mandourr@gmail.com (mailing list archive)
State New
Headers show
Series virtiofsd: Changed various allocations to GLib functions | expand

Commit Message

Mahmoud Mandour April 20, 2021, 3:46 p.m. UTC
Replaced the allocation and deallocation of fuse_req structs
using calloc()/free() call pairs to a GLib's g_try_new0()
and g_free().

Signed-off-by: Mahmoud Mandour <ma.mandourr@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
---
 tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Comments

Vivek Goyal April 20, 2021, 7:03 p.m. UTC | #1
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 05:46:36PM +0200, Mahmoud Mandour wrote:
> Replaced the allocation and deallocation of fuse_req structs
> using calloc()/free() call pairs to a GLib's g_try_new0()
> and g_free().

Hi,

What's the context of these patches. I see all of them are switching
to glib functions. Why to do that? What's the advantage.

Vivek

> 
> Signed-off-by: Mahmoud Mandour <ma.mandourr@gmail.com>
> Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
> ---
>  tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> index 58e32fc963..812cef6ef6 100644
> --- a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> +++ b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ static void list_add_req(struct fuse_req *req, struct fuse_req *next)
>  static void destroy_req(fuse_req_t req)
>  {
>      pthread_mutex_destroy(&req->lock);
> -    free(req);
> +    g_free(req);
>  }
>  
>  void fuse_free_req(fuse_req_t req)
> @@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ static struct fuse_req *fuse_ll_alloc_req(struct fuse_session *se)
>  {
>      struct fuse_req *req;
>  
> -    req = (struct fuse_req *)calloc(1, sizeof(struct fuse_req));
> +    req = g_try_new0(struct fuse_req, 1);
>      if (req == NULL) {
>          fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_ERR, "fuse: failed to allocate request\n");
>      } else {
> @@ -1684,7 +1684,7 @@ static struct fuse_req *check_interrupt(struct fuse_session *se,
>          if (curr->u.i.unique == req->unique) {
>              req->interrupted = 1;
>              list_del_req(curr);
> -            free(curr);
> +            g_free(curr);
>              return NULL;
>          }
>      }
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Virtio-fs mailing list
> Virtio-fs@redhat.com
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virtio-fs
Mahmoud Mandour April 21, 2021, 12:39 a.m. UTC | #2
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 9:03 PM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 05:46:36PM +0200, Mahmoud Mandour wrote:
> > Replaced the allocation and deallocation of fuse_req structs
> > using calloc()/free() call pairs to a GLib's g_try_new0()
> > and g_free().
>
> Hi,
>
> What's the context of these patches. I see all of them are switching
> to glib functions. Why to do that? What's the advantage.
>
> Vivek
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mahmoud Mandour <ma.mandourr@gmail.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c | 6 +++---
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> > index 58e32fc963..812cef6ef6 100644
> > --- a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> > +++ b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> > @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ static void list_add_req(struct fuse_req *req,
> struct fuse_req *next)
> >  static void destroy_req(fuse_req_t req)
> >  {
> >      pthread_mutex_destroy(&req->lock);
> > -    free(req);
> > +    g_free(req);
> >  }
> >
> >  void fuse_free_req(fuse_req_t req)
> > @@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ static struct fuse_req *fuse_ll_alloc_req(struct
> fuse_session *se)
> >  {
> >      struct fuse_req *req;
> >
> > -    req = (struct fuse_req *)calloc(1, sizeof(struct fuse_req));
> > +    req = g_try_new0(struct fuse_req, 1);
> >      if (req == NULL) {
> >          fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_ERR, "fuse: failed to allocate request\n");
> >      } else {
> > @@ -1684,7 +1684,7 @@ static struct fuse_req *check_interrupt(struct
> fuse_session *se,
> >          if (curr->u.i.unique == req->unique) {
> >              req->interrupted = 1;
> >              list_del_req(curr);
> > -            free(curr);
> > +            g_free(curr);
> >              return NULL;
> >          }
> >      }
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Virtio-fs mailing list
> > Virtio-fs@redhat.com
> > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virtio-fs
>
>
Hello Vivek,

Taken from the Qemu Coding Style document in the documentation:
"Use of the malloc/free/realloc/calloc/valloc/memalign/posix_memalign APIs
is not allowed in the QEMU codebase. Instead of these routines, use the
GLib memory allocation routines
g_malloc/g_malloc0/g_new/g_new0/g_realloc/g_free or QEMU’s
qemu_memalign/qemu_blockalign/qemu_vfree APIs."
It's also in the bite-sized contributions page as a task.

Thanks,
Mahmoud
Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) April 27, 2021, 9:48 a.m. UTC | #3
* Mahmoud Mandour (ma.mandourr@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 9:03 PM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 05:46:36PM +0200, Mahmoud Mandour wrote:
> > > Replaced the allocation and deallocation of fuse_req structs
> > > using calloc()/free() call pairs to a GLib's g_try_new0()
> > > and g_free().
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > What's the context of these patches. I see all of them are switching
> > to glib functions. Why to do that? What's the advantage.
> >
> > Vivek
> >
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Mahmoud Mandour <ma.mandourr@gmail.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > >  tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c | 6 +++---
> > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> > b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> > > index 58e32fc963..812cef6ef6 100644
> > > --- a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> > > +++ b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> > > @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ static void list_add_req(struct fuse_req *req,
> > struct fuse_req *next)
> > >  static void destroy_req(fuse_req_t req)
> > >  {
> > >      pthread_mutex_destroy(&req->lock);
> > > -    free(req);
> > > +    g_free(req);
> > >  }
> > >
> > >  void fuse_free_req(fuse_req_t req)
> > > @@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ static struct fuse_req *fuse_ll_alloc_req(struct
> > fuse_session *se)
> > >  {
> > >      struct fuse_req *req;
> > >
> > > -    req = (struct fuse_req *)calloc(1, sizeof(struct fuse_req));
> > > +    req = g_try_new0(struct fuse_req, 1);
> > >      if (req == NULL) {
> > >          fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_ERR, "fuse: failed to allocate request\n");
> > >      } else {
> > > @@ -1684,7 +1684,7 @@ static struct fuse_req *check_interrupt(struct
> > fuse_session *se,
> > >          if (curr->u.i.unique == req->unique) {
> > >              req->interrupted = 1;
> > >              list_del_req(curr);
> > > -            free(curr);
> > > +            g_free(curr);
> > >              return NULL;
> > >          }
> > >      }
> > > --
> > > 2.25.1
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Virtio-fs mailing list
> > > Virtio-fs@redhat.com
> > > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virtio-fs
> >
> >
> Hello Vivek,
> 
> Taken from the Qemu Coding Style document in the documentation:
> "Use of the malloc/free/realloc/calloc/valloc/memalign/posix_memalign APIs
> is not allowed in the QEMU codebase. Instead of these routines, use the
> GLib memory allocation routines
> g_malloc/g_malloc0/g_new/g_new0/g_realloc/g_free or QEMU’s
> qemu_memalign/qemu_blockalign/qemu_vfree APIs."
> It's also in the bite-sized contributions page as a task.

Yes I think generally that's OK; note that virtiofsd is a little unusual
in that a lot of it is imported from an external library and then
changed; so we've not done a lot of these type of qemu-speicific styles.

Dave

> Thanks,
> Mahmoud

> _______________________________________________
> Virtio-fs mailing list
> Virtio-fs@redhat.com
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virtio-fs
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
index 58e32fc963..812cef6ef6 100644
--- a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
+++ b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
@@ -106,7 +106,7 @@  static void list_add_req(struct fuse_req *req, struct fuse_req *next)
 static void destroy_req(fuse_req_t req)
 {
     pthread_mutex_destroy(&req->lock);
-    free(req);
+    g_free(req);
 }
 
 void fuse_free_req(fuse_req_t req)
@@ -130,7 +130,7 @@  static struct fuse_req *fuse_ll_alloc_req(struct fuse_session *se)
 {
     struct fuse_req *req;
 
-    req = (struct fuse_req *)calloc(1, sizeof(struct fuse_req));
+    req = g_try_new0(struct fuse_req, 1);
     if (req == NULL) {
         fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_ERR, "fuse: failed to allocate request\n");
     } else {
@@ -1684,7 +1684,7 @@  static struct fuse_req *check_interrupt(struct fuse_session *se,
         if (curr->u.i.unique == req->unique) {
             req->interrupted = 1;
             list_del_req(curr);
-            free(curr);
+            g_free(curr);
             return NULL;
         }
     }