On 21.04.2021 17:23, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 21/04/2021 15:54, Jan Beulich wrote: >> In the long run I think we want to do away with these type-unsafe >> interfaces, the more that they also request (typically) excess >> alignment. This series of entirely independent patches is >> eliminating the instances where it's relatively clear that they're >> not just "blob" allocations. >> >> v2 only has commit messages extended. >> >> 1: x86/MCE: avoid effectively open-coding xmalloc_array() >> 2: x86/HVM: avoid effectively open-coding xmalloc_array() >> 3: x86/oprofile: avoid effectively open-coding xmalloc_array() >> 4: x86/IRQ: avoid over-alignment in alloc_pirq_struct() >> 5: EFI/runtime: avoid effectively open-coding xmalloc_array() >> 6: kexec: avoid effectively open-coding xzalloc_flex_struct() >> 7: video/lfb: avoid effectively open-coding xzalloc_array() >> 8: Arm/optee: don't open-code xzalloc_flex_struct() > > I'm tempted to nack this, but for now will go with a firm -2 to the > whole series.
I wonder whether you really mean the whole series - patch 8 clearly matches the pattern of two of the v1 patches that you did ack yourself. Jan
