linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] device: Add kernel standard devm

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20131009163053.GF22495@htj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Wed, 9 Oct 2013 12:30:53 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Sangjung Woo <sangjung.woo@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] device: Add kernel standard devm_k.alloc functions

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?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/