On Thu, 10 Oct 2013 16:14:00 -0700 Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-10-10 at 16:06 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 08 Oct 2013 21:59:27 -0700 Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: > > > > > I was a bit surprised to find there isn't a devm_kmalloc. > > > > Yes, the unconditional memset is silly. Especially when the > > function has a handy gfp_t and could be passed __GFP_ZERO. > > > > The comment says "managed kzalloc/kfree for device drivers, no kmalloc, > > always use kzalloc". There's no explanation for this - it looks like > > some ideological thing. > > Try this patch instead: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/10/9/14 > That looks rather better. Apart from forcing a needless memset, the current code will defeat kmemcheck used-uninitialized checking. -- 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/
