[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170405150658.GU3941@linux-x5ow.site>
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 17:06:58 +0200
From: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>
To: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Yuval Shaia <yuval.shaia@...cle.com>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenstock@...il.com>,
Mike Marciniszyn <infinipath@...el.com>,
Sean Hefty <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] IB/qib: Use kcalloc() in qib_init_iba7322_funcs()
On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 04:54:40PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> @@ -7324,8 +7324,9 @@ struct qib_devdata *qib_init_iba7322_funcs(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> >> actual_cnt -= dd->num_pports;
> >>
> >> tabsize = actual_cnt;
> >> - dd->cspec->msix_entries = kzalloc(tabsize *
> >> - sizeof(struct qib_msix_entry), GFP_KERNEL);
> >> + dd->cspec->msix_entries = kcalloc(tabsize,
> >> + sizeof(*dd->cspec->msix_entries),
> >> + GFP_KERNEL);
> >
> > Are we fine with loosing the zeroing of the entries?
>
> How did you get this concern?
>
> Do you really miss such functionality from the other interface?
Ahm... Don't kzalloc() and kcalloc() both pass in __GFP_ZERO?
--
Johannes Thumshirn Storage
jthumshirn@...e.de +49 911 74053 689
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850
Powered by blists - more mailing lists