Re: [PATCH] [USB] UAS: Use kzalloc instead of kmalloc

[Luben Tuikov <ltuikov@yahoo.com>]

--- On Mon, 11/8/10, Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 01:22:22PM
> -0700, Luben Tuikov wrote:
> > "Be conservative in what you send, liberal in what
> > you accept." -- In the spirit of this adage, don't
> > send Command IUs with randomly filled in data in
> > the reserved fields. (Yes, this shows up on the
> > wire.)
> 
> Applied, with a better changelog entry ...

"Better"? Where did you apply it? Your willy/uas.git doesn't show it (updated 3 months ago), neither do Greg's.

BTW, is it customary to change the change log?  What did you change? Do you mind sharing?

> > @@ -660,7 +660,7 @@ static int uas_probe(struct
> usb_interface *intf, const struct usb_device_id *id)
> >         
>     return -ENODEV;
> >      }
> >  
> > -    devinfo = kmalloc(sizeof(struct
> uas_dev_info), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +    devinfo = kzalloc(sizeof(struct
> uas_dev_info), GFP_KERNEL);
> >      if (!devinfo)
> >          return
> -ENOMEM;
> >  
> 
> Except for this hunk, which isn't an IU and doesn't go out
> on the wire.

Lol, no of course it doesn't, silly!

So help us understand: You've preserved all changes from kmalloc->kzalloc and left a single kmalloc alone. And your reason is that "*This* one doesn't go out on the wire?"

Wouldn't if have been more consistent (and harmless) to have changed all of them, just as the patch did?