On 6/16/20 10:26 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
Last time you sent this we couldn't decide which tree it should go
through. Either the crypto tree or through Andrew seems like the right
thing to me.
Also the other issue is that it risks breaking things if people add
new kzfree() instances while we ar
Last time you sent this we couldn't decide which tree it should go
through. Either the crypto tree or through Andrew seems like the right
thing to me.
Also the other issue is that it risks breaking things if people add
new kzfree() instances while we are doing the transition. Could you
just add
As said by Linus:
A symmetric naming is only helpful if it implies symmetries in use.
Otherwise it's actively misleading.
In "kzalloc()", the z is meaningful and an important part of what the
caller wants.
In "kzfree()", the z is actively detrimental, because maybe in the
future we r
