[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID:
<MWHPR1801MB1918035FC2D71BD916DE716ED37A2@MWHPR1801MB1918.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 05:06:40 +0000
From: Ratheesh Kannoth <rkannoth@...vell.com>
To: Brett Creeley <bcreeley@....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.
> 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.
>
> 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