[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240126210139.GD401354@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 21:01:39 +0000
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Brett Creeley <bcreeley@....com>
Cc: Ratheesh Kannoth <rkannoth@...vell.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Subbaraya Sundeep Bhatta <sbhatta@...vell.com>,
Geethasowjanya Akula <gakula@...vell.com>,
Hariprasad Kelam <hkelam@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net] octeontx2-af: Initialize bitmap arrays.
On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 07:56:22AM -0800, Brett Creeley wrote:
>
>
> On 1/24/2024 9:06 PM, Ratheesh Kannoth wrote:
> > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
> >
> >
> > > From: Brett Creeley <bcreeley@....com>
> > > Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net] octeontx2-af: Initialize bitmap arrays.
> > > Is there any reason to not use:
> > >
> > > bitmap_zalloc() and bitmap_free()?
> > Will follow simon's suggestion to keep patch diff minimal. As bitmap_zalloc() does not give any advantage over the other.
>
> It does make some sense because in multiple places you are open coding
> bitmap_zalloc()->bitmap_alloc() in multiple places.
>
> For example:
>
> mcam->bmap = kmalloc_array(BITS_TO_LONGS(mcam->bmap_entries),
> + sizeof(long), GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO);
>
> This is exactly what bitmap_zalloc()->bitmap_alloc() are doing.
Yes, I agree and I should have suggested using
bitmap_zalloc() and bitmap_free().
Powered by blists - more mailing lists