On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 19:25 +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 11:33 +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 10:18 PM, Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2016-12-15 at 10:41 +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Souptick Joarder > > > > > <jrdr.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 6:33 PM, Krzysztof Hałasa <khal...@piap.pl> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Souptick Joarder <jrdr.li...@gmail.com> writes: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We should use dma_pool_zalloc instead of dma_pool_alloc/memset > > > > > > > > [] > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wan/ixp4xx_hss.c > > > > > > > > b/drivers/net/wan/ixp4xx_hss.c > > > > > > > > [] > > > > > > > > @@ -976,10 +976,9 @@ static int init_hdlc_queues(struct port > > > > > > > > *port) > > > > > > > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - if (!(port->desc_tab = dma_pool_alloc(dma_pool, > > > > > > > > GFP_KERNEL, > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > &port->desc_tab_phys))) > > > > > > > > + if (!(port->desc_tab = dma_pool_zalloc(dma_pool, > > > > > > > > GFP_KERNEL, > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > &port->desc_tab_phys))) > > > > > > > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > > > > > - memset(port->desc_tab, 0, POOL_ALLOC_SIZE); > > > > > > > > memset(port->rx_buff_tab, 0, sizeof(port->rx_buff_tab)); > > > > > > > > /* tables */ > > > > > > > > memset(port->tx_buff_tab, 0, sizeof(port->tx_buff_tab)); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This look fine, feel free to send it to the netdev mailing list > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > inclusion. > > > > > > > > > > > > Including netdev mailing list based as requested. > > > > > > > Acked-by: Krzysztof Halasa <khal...@piap.pl> > > > > > > > > [] > > > > > Any comment on this patch ? > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the one in drivers/net/ethernet/xscale/ixp4xx_eth.c > > > > also be changed? > > > > > > Yes, you are right. Do you want me to include it in same patch? > > > > Your choice. I would use a single patch. > > There are few other places where the same change is applicable. > I am planning to put all those changes in a single patch. It includes > changes in drivers/net/ethernet/xscale/ixp4xx_eth.c > > You can review this patch separately.
If you are spanning multiple drivers maintained by different groups, it's probably better to create a patch series, one for each driver, to allow the various maintainers to apply the patches to their individually maintained drivers. Joe
