Paulo wrote:
> In the first case you have to read carefully to make sure that the size
> argument in both the kmalloc and the memset are the same.
If that were the only concern (which it isn't, and I don't pretend to be
addressing the other concerns on this thread) then pulling out the
common sub
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Tue, 5 April 2005 22:01:49 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, Roland Dreier wrote:
> >
> > > > or simply
> > > > if (!(ptr = kcalloc(n, size, ...)))
> > > > goto out;
> > > > and save an additional line of s
On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 21:43:55 +0200 Adrian Bunk wrote:
| On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 05:24:42PM +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
| > Adrian Bunk wrote:
| > >[...]
| > >>>On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 05:26:31PM +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
| > >>
| > >>Hi Adrian,
| > >
| >...
| > >Joerg's list of recursions should
On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 05:24:42PM +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >[...]
> >>>On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 05:26:31PM +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
> >>
> >>Hi Adrian,
> >
> >Hi Paolo,
>
> Paulo, please :)
>...
The second name I got wrong today...
Sorry.
>...
> >Joerg's list of rec
Adrian Bunk wrote:
[...]
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 05:26:31PM +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
Hi Adrian,
Hi Paolo,
Paulo, please :)
Paolo is Spanish (or Italian), whereas Paulo is a Portuguese name.
[...]
I think most will agree that the second piece of code is more "readable".
In this case yes (but it c
On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 03:20:52PM +0200, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Fri, 8 April 2005 15:00:08 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >
> > Joerg's
>
> Please! ;)
Ups, sorry...
> Jörn
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been
On Fri, 8 April 2005 15:00:08 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> Joerg's
Please! ;)
Jörn
--
It's just what we asked for, but not what we want!
-- anonymous
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 01:38:22PM +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 05:26:31PM +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
>
> Hi Adrian,
Hi Paolo,
> >>[...]
> >>pros:
> >> - smaller kernel image size
> >> - smaller (and more readable) source code
> >
> >Which is bette
On Fri, 8 April 2005 13:38:22 +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> >E.g. read my "Stack usage tasks" email. The benefits would only be
> >present for people using GNU gcc 3.4 or SuSE gcc 3.3 on i386, but this
> >is a reasonable subset of the kernel users - and it brings them a
>
Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 05:26:31PM +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
[...]
Hi Paulo,
Hi Adrian,
[...]
pros:
- smaller kernel image size
- smaller (and more readable) source code
Which is better readable depends on what you are used to.
That's true to some degree, but look at code lik
On Apr 06, 2005, at 11:50, Paulo Marques wrote:
kzalloc it is, then.
[...]
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
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 05:26:31PM +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
>
> Hi,
Hi Paulo,
> I noticed there are a number of places in the kernel that do:
>
> ptr = kmalloc(n * size, ...)
> if (!ptr)
> goto out;
> memset(ptr, 0, n * size);
>
> It seems that these could be
Pekka Enberg wrote:
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 stan
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() s
Jörn Engel wrote:
On Tue, 5 April 2005 22:01:49 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote:
On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, Roland Dreier wrote:
> or simply
> if (!(ptr = kcalloc(n, size, ...)))
> goto out;
> and save an additional line of screen realestate while you are at it...
No, please
On Tuesday 05 April 2005 21:00, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Tue, 5 April 2005 17:26:31 +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
> >
> > Would this be a good thing to clean up, or isn't it worth the effort at all?
>
> I would welcome such a stream of patches. But in spite of the calloc
> interface being rather stu
On Tue, 5 April 2005 22:01:49 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, Roland Dreier wrote:
>
> > > or simply
> > > if (!(ptr = kcalloc(n, size, ...)))
> > > goto out;
> > > and save an additional line of screen realestate while you are at
> > it...
> >
On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > or simply
> > if (!(ptr = kcalloc(n, size, ...)))
> > goto out;
> > and save an additional line of screen realestate while you are at it...
>
> No, please don't do that. The general kernel style is to avoid
> as
> or simply
> if (!(ptr = kcalloc(n, size, ...)))
> goto out;
> and save an additional line of screen realestate while you are at it...
No, please don't do that. The general kernel style is to avoid
assignments within conditionals.
- R.
-
To unsubscribe from this lis
On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, Paulo Marques wrote:
> Hi,
> I noticed there are a number of places in the kernel that do:
> ptr = kmalloc(n * size, ...)
> if (!ptr)
> goto out;
> memset(ptr, 0, n * size);
> It seems that these could be replaced by:
> ptr = kcalloc(n, siz
On Tue, 5 April 2005 17:26:31 +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
>
> Would this be a good thing to clean up, or isn't it worth the effort at all?
I would welcome such a stream of patches. But in spite of the calloc
interface being rather stupid, I'd prefer to see patches with kcalloc
instead of kmalloc
Hi,
I noticed there are a number of places in the kernel that do:
ptr = kmalloc(n * size, ...)
if (!ptr)
goto out;
memset(ptr, 0, n * size);
It seems that these could be replaced by:
ptr = kcalloc(n, size, ...)
if (!ptr)
goto o
22 matches
Mail list logo
