malc wrote:
Does anyone object to this moving forward?

Yeah, i object to the split production/development qemu_malloc[z].

It's clear to me that there are still improper callers of qemu_malloc() in the tree. How do you propose we address this for 0.12?

Aborting in a production build is a rather hostile thing to do if it can be avoided.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori


Reply via email to