On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 12:30 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 12:04:42AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > > devm_kzalloc > > > > > > devm_kcalloc > > > > > > devm_kmalloc_array > > > > > > > > > > > > Add gfp.h to device.h for the newly added static inlines. > ... > > Unless Tejun has an objection soon, yes. > > Do we really need devm_kmalloc_array() for devm interface? The > reasonsing behind only having kzalloc was that it's not worthwhile > skipping zeroing for stuff happening during driver init/exit paths. > The resource management overhead itself is already significant and > unscalable compared to the raw cost of alloc/free and the interface > isn't supposed to be used in super-hot paths. Shouldn't > devm_kzalloc() and devm_kcalloc() be enough?
I think API symmetry is a good thing and I think that API dissymmetry is not a good thing when the creation and support cost is very low. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
