Am 15.12.2011 11:19, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 11:02:39AM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote: >> Am 15.12.2011 10:36, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi: >>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 04:28:28PM +0800, 陳韋任 wrote: >>>> I found this in HACKING: >>>> >>>> Please note that NULL check for the g_malloc result is redundant and >>>> that g_malloc() call with zero size is not allowed. >>> >>> So we have: >>> >>> 1. You should not request 0 bytes from g_malloc(). >> >> I think this was related to qemu_malloc() and Anthony's sed run made it >> refer to g_malloc(), even though it works just fine with 0 bytes. We >> should probably remove this sentence. > > If you remove it then you can't interpret it the way I did. It's not > longer possible to say that g_malloc() never returns NULL. You always > have to qualify that with "unless you ask for 0 bytes". :)
Try this: "g_malloc() never returns an error". ;-) Kevin
