[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <41628185-039e-6cb2-b615-dd5e8af338e7@suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 12:43:45 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Yi Wang <wang.yi59@....com.cn>, cl@...ux.com
Cc: penberg@...nel.org, rientjes@...gle.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xue.zhihong@....com.cn,
wang.liang82@....com.cn, Liao Pingfang <liao.pingfang@....com.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, slab: Use kmem_cache_zalloc() instead of
kmem_cache_alloc() with flag GFP_ZERO.
On 6/17/20 9:15 AM, Yi Wang wrote:
> From: Liao Pingfang <liao.pingfang@....com.cn>
>
> Use kmem_cache_zalloc instead of manually calling kmem_cache_alloc
> with flag GFP_ZERO.
>
> Signed-off-by: Liao Pingfang <liao.pingfang@....com.cn>
> ---
> include/linux/slab.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/slab.h b/include/linux/slab.h
> index 6d45488..1fa62d9 100644
> --- a/include/linux/slab.h
> +++ b/include/linux/slab.h
> @@ -656,7 +656,7 @@ extern void *__kmalloc_node_track_caller(size_t, gfp_t, int, unsigned long);
> */
> static inline void *kmem_cache_zalloc(struct kmem_cache *k, gfp_t flags)
> {
> - return kmem_cache_alloc(k, flags | __GFP_ZERO);
> + return kmem_cache_zalloc(k, flags);
Did you test this patch?
> }
>
> /**
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists