Aneesh Kumar K. V wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 23:35:36 +0300 (MSK), malc <av1...@comtv.ru> wrote:
>> On Wed, 3 Mar 2010, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>
>>> This get the mount to work on the guest
>>>
>>> [ki...@linux.vnet.ibm.com: malloc to qemu_malloc conversion]
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Anthony Liguori <aligu...@us.ibm.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy <e...@in.ibm.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.ku...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>> hw/virtio-9p-local.c | 7 ++
>>> hw/virtio-9p.c | 169
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>> 2 files changed, 174 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/hw/virtio-9p-local.c b/hw/virtio-9p-local.c
>>> index 204437c..9752f76 100644
>>> --- a/hw/virtio-9p-local.c
>>> +++ b/hw/virtio-9p-local.c
>>> @@ -72,9 +72,16 @@ static int local_setuid(void *opaque, uid_t uid)
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static ssize_t local_readlink(void *opaque, const char *path,
>>> + char *buf, size_t bufsz)
>>> +{
>>> + return readlink(rpath(path), buf, bufsz);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static V9fsPosixFileOperations ops = {
>>> .lstat = local_lstat,
>>> .setuid = local_setuid,
>>> + .readlink = local_readlink,
>>> };
>>>
>>> V9fsPosixFileOperations *virtio_9p_init_local(const char *path)
>>> diff --git a/hw/virtio-9p.c b/hw/virtio-9p.c
>>> index c63ac80..10bcd89 100644
>>> --- a/hw/virtio-9p.c
>>> +++ b/hw/virtio-9p.c
>>> @@ -102,6 +102,21 @@ static int posix_setuid(V9fsState *s, uid_t uid)
>>> return s->ops->setuid(s->ops->opaque, uid);
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static ssize_t posix_readlink(V9fsState *s, V9fsString *path, V9fsString
>>> *buf)
>>> +{
>>> + ssize_t len;
>>> +
>>> + buf->data = qemu_malloc(1024);
>>> +
>>> + len = s->ops->readlink(s->ops->opaque, path->data, buf->data, 1024 -
>>> 1);
>>> + if (len > -1) {
>>> + buf->size = len;
>>> + buf->data[len] = 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return len;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static void v9fs_string_free(V9fsString *str)
>>> {
>>> free(str->data);
>> Should be qemu_free, no?
>>
>
>
> Updated the patch
Is there any reason (other than being coding style) in using qemu_free()
instead of free()? As per qem-malloc.c qemu_free() is nothing but free().
The reason I am asking is.. tracking string allocs become tricky
if some of them were defined using qemu_alloc() and others are allocated through
sprintf().
Thanks,
JV
>
> -aneesh
>
>
