Daniel P. Berrangé writes:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 06:04:10PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 15/03/2021 17.57, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> > On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 16:53, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> > > -Prefer g_new(T, n) instead of g_malloc(sizeof(T) ``*`` n) for the
>> > > following
>> > > +Care sh
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 05:54:17PM +, Alex Bennée wrote:
>
> Daniel P. Berrangé writes:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 06:04:10PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> >> On 15/03/2021 17.57, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 16:53, Alex Bennée wrote:
> >> > > -Prefer g_new(T, n) inst
Daniel P. Berrangé writes:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 06:04:10PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 15/03/2021 17.57, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> > On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 16:53, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> > > -Prefer g_new(T, n) instead of g_malloc(sizeof(T) ``*`` n) for the
>> > > following
>> > > +Care
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 06:04:10PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 15/03/2021 17.57, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 16:53, Alex Bennée wrote:
> > > -Prefer g_new(T, n) instead of g_malloc(sizeof(T) ``*`` n) for the
> > > following
> > > +Care should be taken to avoid introducing p
On 15/03/2021 17.57, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 16:53, Alex Bennée wrote:
-Prefer g_new(T, n) instead of g_malloc(sizeof(T) ``*`` n) for the following
+Care should be taken to avoid introducing places where the guest could
+trigger an exit. For example using ``g_malloc`` on sta
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 16:53, Alex Bennée wrote:
> -Prefer g_new(T, n) instead of g_malloc(sizeof(T) ``*`` n) for the following
> +Care should be taken to avoid introducing places where the guest could
> +trigger an exit. For example using ``g_malloc`` on start-up is fine
> +if the result of a fai
