On 01/09/14 22:22, Al Viro wrote:
On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 03:38:51PM +0100, Rob Jones wrote:
kmalloc where it is expected to be a size_t.
Which is a mistake too because allocations are never that large.
Yet.
*raised eyebrow*
You do realize that kmalloc() gives physically contiguous allocation, right?
Do please try to not be quite so patronizing. It's very counter-
productive.
And refuses to allocate more than KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE, while we are at it.
With allocations anywhere near such range being very heavily discouraged.
There might or might not be point in using size_t for kmalloc() argument,
but "future-proofing" isn't it.
Indeed, and I am following up those arguments with people that may want
to be constructive.
--
Rob Jones
Codethink Ltd
mailto:rob.jo...@codethink.co.uk
tel:+44 161 236 5575
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/