[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <05156615-8dcc-41ec-aa6a-aa41c515d25b@amd.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 07:56:22 -0800
From: Brett Creeley <bcreeley@....com>
To: Ratheesh Kannoth <rkannoth@...vell.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: 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 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.
>
>>
>> This is pretty much bitmap_zalloc(), except with devm. As Simon is asking, is
>> devm really necessary?
> Will use kcalloc.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists