Re: [PATCH 4/4] kmemcheck v4

2008-02-15 Thread Vegard Nossum
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The ifdefs are quite ugly. I would recommend to define standard > functions (kmemcheck_init_zero or similar and an own __GFP flag) that can > be used without ifdef and easily nop'ed out on !KMEMCHECK kernels. Yes, they ar

Re: [PATCH 4/4] kmemcheck v4

2008-02-14 Thread Andi Kleen
The ifdefs are quite ugly. I would recommend to define standard functions (kmemcheck_init_zero or similar and an own __GFP flag) that can be used without ifdef and easily nop'ed out on !KMEMCHECK kernels. -Andi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the bod

Re: [PATCH 4/4] kmemcheck v4

2008-02-14 Thread Vegard Nossum
On 2/14/08, Pekka Enberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > > Vegard Nossum wrote: > > diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h > > index 412672a..7bdb37f 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/skbuff.h > > +++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h > > @@ -1294,7 +1294,11 @@ static inline vo

Re: [PATCH 4/4] kmemcheck v4

2008-02-14 Thread Pekka Enberg
Hi, Vegard Nossum wrote: diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h index 412672a..7bdb37f 100644 --- a/include/linux/skbuff.h +++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h @@ -1294,7 +1294,11 @@ static inline void __skb_queue_purge(struct sk_buff_head *list) static inline struct sk_buff *__