On 08/18/12 22:51, Stefan Weil wrote: > valgrind report: > > ==24534== 232 bytes in 2 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 1,245 of > 1,601 > ==24534== at 0x4824F20: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:236) > ==24534== by 0x293C88: malloc_and_trace (vl.c:2281) > ==24534== by 0x489AD99: ??? (in /lib/libglib-2.0.so.0.2400.1) > ==24534== by 0x489B23B: g_malloc0 (in /lib/libglib-2.0.so.0.2400.1) > ==24534== by 0x2B4EFC: opts_visitor_new (opts-visitor.c:376) > ==24534== by 0x29DEA5: net_client_init (net.c:708) > ==24534== by 0x29E6C7: net_init_client (net.c:966) > ==24534== by 0x2C2179: qemu_opts_foreach (qemu-option.c:1114) > ==24534== by 0x29E85B: net_init_clients (net.c:1008) > ==24534== by 0x296F40: main (vl.c:3463) > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil <s...@weilnetz.de> > --- > qapi/opts-visitor.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/qapi/opts-visitor.c b/qapi/opts-visitor.c > index a59d306..e048b6c 100644 > --- a/qapi/opts-visitor.c > +++ b/qapi/opts-visitor.c > @@ -416,7 +416,7 @@ opts_visitor_cleanup(OptsVisitor *ov) > g_hash_table_destroy(ov->unprocessed_opts); > } > g_free(ov->fake_id_opt); > - memset(ov, '\0', sizeof *ov); > + g_free(ov); > } > >
I don't remember why I thought the object would / should live on. I must have implemented what I thought was safe / correct for the life-cycle, except I got the life-cycle wrong. Face, meet palm. Reviewed-by: Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> Thanks & sorry! Laszlo
