* [PATCH -next] tpm: Use kzalloc for allocating only one thing
@ 2020-12-29 13:51 Zheng Yongjun
2020-12-29 16:23 ` James Bottomley
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Zheng Yongjun @ 2020-12-29 13:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: peterhuewe, jarkko, linux-integrity, linux-kernel; +Cc: jgg, Zheng Yongjun
Use kzalloc rather than kcalloc(1,...)
The semantic patch that makes this change is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
// <smpl>
@@
@@
- kcalloc(1,
+ kzalloc(
...)
// </smpl>
Signed-off-by: Zheng Yongjun <zhengyongjun3@huawei.com>
---
drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c
index ca7158fa6e6c..4d8415e3b778 100644
--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c
@@ -794,7 +794,7 @@ int tpm1_pm_suspend(struct tpm_chip *chip, u32 tpm_suspend_pcr)
*/
int tpm1_get_pcr_allocation(struct tpm_chip *chip)
{
- chip->allocated_banks = kcalloc(1, sizeof(*chip->allocated_banks),
+ chip->allocated_banks = kzalloc(sizeof(*chip->allocated_banks),
GFP_KERNEL);
if (!chip->allocated_banks)
return -ENOMEM;
--
2.22.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH -next] tpm: Use kzalloc for allocating only one thing
2020-12-29 13:51 [PATCH -next] tpm: Use kzalloc for allocating only one thing Zheng Yongjun
@ 2020-12-29 16:23 ` James Bottomley
2021-01-05 5:59 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: James Bottomley @ 2020-12-29 16:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zheng Yongjun, peterhuewe, jarkko, linux-integrity, linux-kernel; +Cc: jgg
On Tue, 2020-12-29 at 21:51 +0800, Zheng Yongjun wrote:
> Use kzalloc rather than kcalloc(1,...)
>
> The semantic patch that makes this change is as follows:
> (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
What's the reason for wanting to do this transformation?
> drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-
> cmd.c
> index ca7158fa6e6c..4d8415e3b778 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c
> @@ -794,7 +794,7 @@ int tpm1_pm_suspend(struct tpm_chip *chip, u32
> tpm_suspend_pcr)
> */
> int tpm1_get_pcr_allocation(struct tpm_chip *chip)
> {
> - chip->allocated_banks = kcalloc(1, sizeof(*chip-
> >allocated_banks),
> + chip->allocated_banks = kzalloc(sizeof(*chip->allocated_banks),
> GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!chip->allocated_banks)
> return -ENOMEM;
The reason tpm1 has this is because it mirrors the allocation in tpm2
so we retain code consistency. It's a fairly minor advantage, so it
could be changed if you have a better rationale ... but what is it?
James
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH -next] tpm: Use kzalloc for allocating only one thing
2020-12-29 16:23 ` James Bottomley
@ 2021-01-05 5:59 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jarkko Sakkinen @ 2021-01-05 5:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: James Bottomley
Cc: Zheng Yongjun, peterhuewe, linux-integrity, linux-kernel, jgg
On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 08:23:49AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-12-29 at 21:51 +0800, Zheng Yongjun wrote:
> > Use kzalloc rather than kcalloc(1,...)
> >
> > The semantic patch that makes this change is as follows:
> > (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
>
> What's the reason for wanting to do this transformation?
>
> > drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-
> > cmd.c
> > index ca7158fa6e6c..4d8415e3b778 100644
> > --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c
> > +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm1-cmd.c
> > @@ -794,7 +794,7 @@ int tpm1_pm_suspend(struct tpm_chip *chip, u32
> > tpm_suspend_pcr)
> > */
> > int tpm1_get_pcr_allocation(struct tpm_chip *chip)
> > {
> > - chip->allocated_banks = kcalloc(1, sizeof(*chip-
> > >allocated_banks),
> > + chip->allocated_banks = kzalloc(sizeof(*chip->allocated_banks),
> > GFP_KERNEL);
> > if (!chip->allocated_banks)
> > return -ENOMEM;
>
> The reason tpm1 has this is because it mirrors the allocation in tpm2
> so we retain code consistency. It's a fairly minor advantage, so it
> could be changed if you have a better rationale ... but what is it?
Yup, I neither understand this.
> James
/Jarkko
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-01-05 6:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-12-29 13:51 [PATCH -next] tpm: Use kzalloc for allocating only one thing Zheng Yongjun
2020-12-29 16:23 ` James Bottomley
2021-01-05 5:59 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).