Christoph Lameter wrote: >> I disagree. There are plenty of boundary conditions where 0 is not >> really a special case, and making it a special case just complicates >> things. I think at least some of the patches posted to silence this >> warning have been generally negative for code quality. If we were >> seeing lots of zero-sized allocations then that might indicate something >> is amiss, but it seems to me that there's just a scattered handful. >> >> I agree that it's always a useful debugging aid to make sure that >> allocated regions are not over-run, but 0-sized allocations are not >> special in this regard. >> > > Still insisting on it even after the discovery of the cpuset kmalloc(0) issue? >
Sure. That was a normal buffer-overrun bug. There's nothing special about 0-sized allocations. J - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
