qemuBuildInterfaceCommandLine: Reorder VIR_FREE

When we have variables A, B, C then there are two ways to free
them. Either in the order they are declared or the reversed one.
Any other ordering is confusing. In this commit I'm reordering
calls to VIR_FREE in the reversed order.
Signed-off-by: NMichal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: NErik Skultety <eskultet@redhat.com>

src/qemu/qemu_command.c

@@ -8328,7 +8328,8 @@ qemuBuildInterfaceCommandLine(virQEMUDriverPtr driver,
                               int **nicindexes)
 {
     int ret = -1;
-    char *nic = NULL, *host = NULL;
+    char *nic = NULL;
+    char *host = NULL;
     int *tapfd = NULL;
     size_t tapfdSize = 0;
     int *vhostfd = NULL;
@@ -8595,24 +8596,24 @@ qemuBuildInterfaceCommandLine(virQEMUDriverPtr driver,
         virSetError(saved_err);
         virFreeError(saved_err);
     }
-    for (i = 0; tapfd && i < tapfdSize && tapfd[i] >= 0; i++) {
-        if (ret < 0)
-            VIR_FORCE_CLOSE(tapfd[i]);
-        if (tapfdName)
-            VIR_FREE(tapfdName[i]);
-    }
     for (i = 0; vhostfd && i < vhostfdSize && vhostfd[i] >= 0; i++) {
         if (ret < 0)
             VIR_FORCE_CLOSE(vhostfd[i]);
         if (vhostfdName)
             VIR_FREE(vhostfdName[i]);
     }
-    VIR_FREE(tapfd);
+    VIR_FREE(vhostfdName);
+    for (i = 0; tapfd && i < tapfdSize && tapfd[i] >= 0; i++) {
+        if (ret < 0)
+            VIR_FORCE_CLOSE(tapfd[i]);
+        if (tapfdName)
+            VIR_FREE(tapfdName[i]);
+    }
+    VIR_FREE(tapfdName);
     VIR_FREE(vhostfd);
-    VIR_FREE(nic);
+    VIR_FREE(tapfd);
     VIR_FREE(host);
-    VIR_FREE(tapfdName);
-    VIR_FREE(vhostfdName);
+    VIR_FREE(nic);
     return ret;
 }