On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, Joonwoo Park wrote: > 2007/11/26, Robert P. J. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > i realized that. but all you can say is that only amb_init() calls > > setup_dev() *currently*. when you're not looking, someone else might > > (for whatever reason) call setup_dev() from elsewhere, and *that* call > > might not zero that memory area. > > > > IMHO, the only safe transforms of kmalloc+memset -> kzalloc are those > > in which the flow of control is unmistakable and invariant. splitting > > that across a function call seems like a dangerous thing to do. > > (except, of course, in the case, where the kzalloc() is added inside > > the function -- then all callers are entitled to simplify *their* > > code. but that's different.) > > > > in any event, i just thought i'd point it out. if you're absolutely > > sure there will never be another call to setup_dev() from somewhere > > else, then, yes, it's safe. > > > > I understood your opinions. and partially agree with you. > But isn't it a unfounded fear?
i don't know, i just thought i'd mention it. if no one thinks it's an issue, it's certainly fine with me. rday ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca ======================================================================== - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
