From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.fh-wedel.de ([213.39.232.198] helo=moskovskaya.fh-wedel.de) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.52 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1EM2dQ-0005r8-VV for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 08:08:24 -0400 Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 14:07:48 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn?= Engel To: "Artem B. Bityutskiy" Message-ID: <20051002120748.GA10697@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> References: <20051001050003.GD11137@plexity.net> <1128152797.3546.15.camel@sauron.oktetlabs.ru> <20051001080027.GM25424@plexity.net> <433E432B.7010406@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <433E432B.7010406@yandex.ru> Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [MTD] kmalloc + memzero -> kzalloc conversion List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sat, 1 October 2005 12:04:59 +0400, Artem B. Bityutskiy wrote: > Deepak Saxena wrote: > >I see it more as an API usage cleanup then a "fix" of any sort. > > > Well, actually it may be helpful in only future, for example, if it is > known that the allocated memory is zero-filled already, memzero() may be > avoided at all. Even today, kzalloc() takes less code than kmalloc() + memset(). Shrinks your binary size by a tiny amount. Jörn -- Mundie uses a textbook tactic of manipulation: start with some reasonable talk, and lead the audience to an unreasonable conclusion. -- Bruce Perens