[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160822145807.4b8fb1cb.cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 14:58:07 +0200
From: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: wharms@....de, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
Christian Bornträger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
David Hildenbrand <dahi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] KVM-S390: Improve determination of sizes in
kvm_s390_import_bp_data()
On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 12:55:11 +0200
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
> This is _not_ premature optimization. (k)calloc tells the reader that
> it's safe not to initialize part of the array. kmalloc_array says the
> opposite. Using the right function adds important hints in the
> code---which unlike comments cannot get stale without also introducing
> visible bugs.
Ack. I'd accept a patch changing this to use kmalloc_array.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists