From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Yin Kangkai <kangkai.yin@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 10:00:26 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] malloc -> calloc and fix some memory leaks.
Message-Id: <20100802100026.GL29131@kai-debian>
List-Id: <linux-hotplug.vger.kernel.org>
References: <20100802034353.GK29131@kai-debian>
In-Reply-To: <20100802034353.GK29131@kai-debian>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org

On 2010-08-02, 11:00 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 05:43, Yin Kangkai <kangkai.yin@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > From fd81bea16d3e1e93aebc8cb80ec16ae9c20c6e41 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Yin Kangkai <kangkai.yin@intel.com>
> > Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 11:22:49 +0800
> > Subject: [PATCH 2/2] malloc -> calloc and fix some memory leaks.
> >
> > calloc so that we do not need to memset each of them.
> 
> Any reason to change things to calloc() where no memset() is done or needed?

I changed the malloc and memset pair of udev_rules allocation, and for
consistence, I finished the others :)

Maybe it's only my personal taste that I like to memset memory once I
malloc success. If this is not necessary, I can split the patch.

Thanks,
Kangkai