Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Dec 2006, Pekka Enberg wrote:
>> On 12/9/06, Robert P. J. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> once the order of the kcalloc() args is corrected, that
>>> would be followed by a single subsequent patch that did the
>>> kcalloc->kzalloc transformation all at once.
>
Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On 12/9/06, Robert P. J. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> normally what i would do but, in the case of that patch, there are
>> five files affected, *all* of which are in totally different
>> subsystems (macintosh, net, scsi, usb, sunrpc). are you suggesting
>> that up to 5
On Sat, 9 Dec 2006, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On 12/9/06, Robert P. J. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > no. those two submissions represent two logically different "fixes"
> > and i have no intention of combining them.
>
> Like I said, fixing the order of kcalloc parameters with a follow-up
> patch
On 12/9/06, Robert P. J. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
no. those two submissions represent two logically different "fixes"
and i have no intention of combining them.
Like I said, fixing the order of kcalloc parameters with a follow-up
patch to use kzalloc is just plain stupid. You can ignore
On Sat, 9 Dec 2006, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On 12/9/06, Robert P. J. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > argh, in that i've already mentioned that, following the guidelines in
> > "SubmittingPatches", i prefer that each of my patches have one logical
> > purpose. once the order of the kcalloc() args
On 12/9/06, Robert P. J. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
normally what i would do but, in the case of that patch, there are
five files affected, *all* of which are in totally different
subsystems (macintosh, net, scsi, usb, sunrpc). are you suggesting
that up to 5 different people be CC'ed?
and
On 12/9/06, Robert P. J. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
argh, in that i've already mentioned that, following the guidelines in
"SubmittingPatches", i prefer that each of my patches have one logical
purpose. once the order of the kcalloc() args is corrected, that
would be followed by a single sub
On Sat, 9 Dec 2006, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On 12/9/06, Pekka Enberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You really ought to send these cleanups to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with LKML
> > cc'd to get them merged.
>
> ...or even better, the relevant maintainer.
normally what i would do but, in the case of that p
On Sat, 9 Dec 2006, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On 12/9/06, Robert P. J. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > @@ -705,7 +705,7 @@ static int uss720_probe(struct usb_inter
> > /*
> > * Allocate parport interface
> > */
> > - if (!(priv = kcalloc(sizeof(struct parport_uss720_
On 12/9/06, Pekka Enberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You really ought to send these cleanups to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with LKML
cc'd to get them merged.
...or even better, the relevant maintainer.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [
On 12/9/06, Robert P. J. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
@@ -705,7 +705,7 @@ static int uss720_probe(struct usb_inter
/*
* Allocate parport interface
*/
- if (!(priv = kcalloc(sizeof(struct parport_uss720_private), 1,
GFP_KERNEL))) {
+ if (!(priv = kcalloc(1,
Some calls to kcalloc() appear to have the first two args in the
wrong order.
Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/macintosh/smu.c |2 +-
drivers/net/skge.c |2 +-
drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_hipd.c |2 +-
drivers/usb/misc/
12 matches
Mail list logo
