From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 12:10:13 +0000 Subject: Re: Replacing specific kmalloc() calls by kmalloc_array()? Message-Id: List-Id: References: <82b84c9c-38a4-4d17-910f-312668dbae01@users.sourceforge.net> <033d8595-d051-1fa8-95b1-5d2056eb5667@users.sourceforge.net> <57B562F3.1080004@bfs.de> <9db1986a-9b93-72ca-f35e-85b5b5e9f351@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <9db1986a-9b93-72ca-f35e-85b5b5e9f351@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Julia Lawall , walter harms , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_Borntr=c3=a4ger?= , Cornelia Huck , David Hildenbrand , Heiko Carstens , Martin Schwidefsky , =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org > Or kmalloc_array, since zeroing is not necessary. Might be an idea for > a new Coccinelle script, like > > - kmalloc (N * sizeof T, GFP) > + kmalloc_array(N, sizeof T, GFP) I have picked your idea up. The corresponding script for the semantic patch language became longer than your general suggestion (if additional source code control flow aspects are integrated). Would it make sense to check any more function combinations in a similar way? Regards, Markus