[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1281405801.1954.65.camel@Joe-Laptop.home>
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2010 19:03:21 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Anirban Chakraborty <anirban.chakraborty@...gic.com>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>,
Amit Salecha <amit.salecha@...gic.com>,
Linux Driver <Linux-Driver@...gic.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Sucheta Chakraborty <sucheta.chakraborty@...gic.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] qlcnic: using too much stack
On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 18:43 -0700, Anirban Chakraborty wrote:
> Your patch is fine except that the preferred way is to use kzalloc over kaclloc. kzalloc does not need that extra
> argument that you are passing to kcalloc.
You probably meant to write "my preferred way"
as the kcalloc to "kzalloc with a multiply"
ratio is pretty high.
It's actually about 2.5 to 1 in favor of kcalloc.
$ grep -rw --include=*.[ch] kcalloc * | wc -l
419
$ grep -rP --include=*.[ch] "\bkzalloc\s*\(\s*\w+\s*\*\s*\w+" * | \
grep -vP "\bkzalloc\s*\(\s*sizeof\s+\*\s*\w+\s*," | wc -l
164
(the grep -vP avoids kzalloc(sizeof *p, GFP_foo)
Actually, there might be a reason to use kzalloc
in that location to match the other similar use
a few lines away, but I'd prefer that the other
use be converted to kcalloc.
cheers, Joe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists