Hi Arnaldo,
On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 17:02:39 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 09:02:36AM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
>> On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:40:51 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>> > Em Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:49:11PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
>> >> On
Em Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 09:02:36AM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:40:51 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:49:11PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> >> On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 11:52:04 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >> > All the rest
Em Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 09:02:36AM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:40:51 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:49:11PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 11:52:04 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
All the rest is ok, so
Hi Arnaldo,
On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 17:02:39 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 09:02:36AM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:40:51 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:49:11PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
On Fri, 13
Hi Arnaldo,
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:40:51 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:49:11PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
>> On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 11:52:04 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>> > All the rest is ok, so its just the malloc + strcpy that remains to be
>>
Em Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:49:11PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 11:52:04 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > All the rest is ok, so its just the malloc + strcpy that remains to be
> > converted, do you want me to do it?
> Hmm.. did you mean like this?
>
Em Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:49:11PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 11:52:04 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
All the rest is ok, so its just the malloc + strcpy that remains to be
converted, do you want me to do it?
Hmm.. did you mean like this?
str
Hi Arnaldo,
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:40:51 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:49:11PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 11:52:04 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
All the rest is ok, so its just the malloc + strcpy that remains to be
Hi Arnaldo,
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 11:52:04 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>> -str = malloc_or_die(6);
>> +str = malloc(6);
>> +if (str == NULL)
>> +break;
>>
Hi Arnaldo,
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 11:52:04 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
-str = malloc_or_die(6);
+str = malloc(6);
+if (str == NULL)
+break;
Em Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 09:15:46AM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> Hi Arnaldo,
>
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 15:41:47 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:36:16PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> >> Those functions are for stringify filter arguments. As caller of
> >>
Em Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 09:15:46AM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
Hi Arnaldo,
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 15:41:47 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:36:16PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
Those functions are for stringify filter arguments. As caller of
those
Hi Arnaldo,
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 15:41:47 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:36:16PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
>> Those functions are for stringify filter arguments. As caller of
>> those functions handles NULL string properly, it seems that it's
>> enough to
Em Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:36:16PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> Those functions are for stringify filter arguments. As caller of
> those functions handles NULL string properly, it seems that it's
> enough to return NULL rather than calling die().
>
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim
> ---
>
Em Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:36:16PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
Those functions are for stringify filter arguments. As caller of
those functions handles NULL string properly, it seems that it's
enough to return NULL rather than calling die().
Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim namhy...@kernel.org
Hi Arnaldo,
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 15:41:47 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:36:16PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
Those functions are for stringify filter arguments. As caller of
those functions handles NULL string properly, it seems that it's
enough to return
Those functions are for stringify filter arguments. As caller of
those functions handles NULL string properly, it seems that it's
enough to return NULL rather than calling die().
Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim
---
tools/lib/traceevent/parse-filter.c | 58 +++--
1
Those functions are for stringify filter arguments. As caller of
those functions handles NULL string properly, it seems that it's
enough to return NULL rather than calling die().
Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim namhy...@kernel.org
---
tools/lib/traceevent/parse-filter.c | 58
18 matches
Mail list logo
