Hi,
On Apr 6, 2005 3:15 PM, Paulo Marques <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
However "calloc" is the standard C interface for doing this, so it makes some sense to use it here as well... :(
I initally submitted kcalloc() with just one parameter but Arjan wanted it to be similar to standard calloc() so we could check for overflows. I don't see any reason not to introduce kzalloc() for the common case you mentioned (as suggested by Denis).
kzalloc it is, then.
By the way I did a quick measurement to see how much we could gain in kernel size by doing this. This is with a 2.6.11-rc2, defconfig kernel:
with kmalloc+memset: vmlinuz: 5521614 bzImage: 2005274
with kzalloc: vmlinuz: 5513422 bzImage: 2003927
So we gain 8kB on the uncompressed image and 1347 bytes on the compressed one. This was just a dumb test and actual results might be better due to smarter human cleanups.
Not a spectacular gain per se, but the increase in code readability is still worth it, IMHO.
-- Paulo Marques - www.grupopie.com
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
