Il 19/01/2013 11:21, Blue Swirl ha scritto: >> > Does the function really needs to be called qemu_vmalloc? If not, >> > having the same name for two different things is bad. > I've just sent a patch to fix this. > > But new code could be introduced that used qemu_vmalloc() so I'm not > sure this approach is the best.
Right now there isn't even a matching qemu_vfree(); the implementation in util/oslib-posix.c would be used and that would use free() instead of munmap(). So, code that happened to use qemu_vmalloc() outside bsd-user would be completely wrong. It was a time bomb, and it's a good thing that it was exposed. Paolo
