[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0f977cdb-039d-789b-802f-02746f5ad8ea@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 09:33:38 +0800
From: Liu Shixin <liushixin2@...wei.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Patrick Wang <patrick.wang.shcn@...il.com>,
Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] mm/kmemleak: move the initialisation of object to
__link_object
On 2023/10/24 2:16, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 10:51:25 +0800 Liu Shixin <liushixin2@...wei.com> wrote:
>
>> Leave __alloc_object() just do the actual allocation and __link_object()
>> do the full initialisation.
> Changelog doesn't describe why we're making this change?
> .
In patch (“mm: kmemleak: split __create_object into two functions”), the initialisation
of object has been splited in two places. Catalin said it feels a bit weird and error prone.
So leave __alloc_object() just do the actual allocation and __link_object() do the full
initialisation.
thanks,
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists