From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-lf1-f66.google.com (mail-lf1-f66.google.com
 [209.85.167.66])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AA9846970E
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Wed,  5 Feb 2020 13:06:23 +0300 (MSK)
Received: by mail-lf1-f66.google.com with SMTP id b15so1056659lfc.4
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Wed, 05 Feb 2020 02:06:23 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 13:06:20 +0300
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20200205100620.GK12445@uranus>
References: <20200128192249.10023-1-gorcunov@gmail.com>
 <20200128192249.10023-3-gorcunov@gmail.com>
 <20200203143928.GG547@tarantool.org> <20200204221556.GE20146@atlas>
 <20200205074655.GH12445@uranus> <20200205094945.GB4624@atlas>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200205094945.GB4624@atlas>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v7 2/5] box/applier: add missing
 diag_set on region_alloc failure
List-Id: Tarantool development patches <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/options/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/listinfo/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Konstantin Osipov <kostja.osipov@gmail.com>
Cc: tml <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>

On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 12:49:46PM +0300, Konstantin Osipov wrote:
> > 
> > IOW I think we should handle NULLs to be stable in long terms.
> 
> While I sort of agree with the discipline of checking the malloc
> return value, just as a style habit, you won't get NULL
> from malloc() in practice. OOM killer will do its job first. 
> 
> Also if you do, you're just as good crashing next line, when
> accessing null pointer. 

Actually I've seen some ticket in our github about wrapping
malloc with xmalloc which would crash on malloc failure.
IOW, lets leave explisit check for now.