CodingStyle: "kzalloc()" versus "kcalloc(1,...)"

CodingStyle: "kzalloc()" versus "kcalloc(1,...)"

[Robert P. J. Day]

  i just noticed that there are numerous invocations of kcalloc()
where the hard-coded first arg of # elements is "1", which seems like
an inappropriate use of kcalloc().

  the only rationale i can see is that kcalloc() guarantees that the
memory will be set to zero, so i'm guessing that this form of
kcalloc() was used before kzalloc() existed, or was used by folks who
didn't know that kzalloc() existed.

  if a (zero-filled) single struct is being allocated, is it worth
codifying that that allocation should use kzalloc() and not
kcalloc(1,...)?

rday

Re: CodingStyle: "kzalloc()" versus "kcalloc(1,...)"

[Adrian Bunk]

On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 07:16:15PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> 
>   i just noticed that there are numerous invocations of kcalloc()
> where the hard-coded first arg of # elements is "1", which seems like
> an inappropriate use of kcalloc().
> 
>   the only rationale i can see is that kcalloc() guarantees that the
> memory will be set to zero, so i'm guessing that this form of
> kcalloc() was used before kzalloc() existed, or was used by folks who
> didn't know that kzalloc() existed.
> 
>   if a (zero-filled) single struct is being allocated, is it worth
> codifying that that allocation should use kzalloc() and not
> kcalloc(1,...)?

kcalloc() calls kzalloc(), so it doesn't matter at all which to use.

> rday

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed