From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B7B1C433DB for ; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 16:24:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8E7D22209 for ; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 16:24:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726244AbgL2QYe (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Dec 2020 11:24:34 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47698 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726111AbgL2QYd (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Dec 2020 11:24:33 -0500 Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [IPv6:2607:fcd0:100:8a00::2]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2659C0613D6; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 08:23:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C90912804FC; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 08:23:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=hansenpartnership.com; s=20151216; t=1609259031; bh=mRv9V7Pz0EGuRWoR1V4hRnMT5CGCvBoBPUdEvd87vfQ=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ivv5UqWjPXqs7FJHnVX8vaTPPkaLiBaesP8RmYaQF+f8+vZdBCs6LzK3Iubt2mmbo Nup5KVM81tojM7jj0L8um1mtxIyuNNEkScFeSAVKYybpUpmj+5Cw0y1n2BaiAar2HM rXzwA8JB0dZIUK5MtjBvcd5MxnVgt3Vjmu4uVlag= Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BySELZgHsVTY; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 08:23:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from jarvis.int.hansenpartnership.com (unknown [IPv6:2601:600:8280:66d1::c447]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1440912800AC; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 08:23:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=hansenpartnership.com; s=20151216; t=1609259031; bh=mRv9V7Pz0EGuRWoR1V4hRnMT5CGCvBoBPUdEvd87vfQ=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ivv5UqWjPXqs7FJHnVX8vaTPPkaLiBaesP8RmYaQF+f8+vZdBCs6LzK3Iubt2mmbo Nup5KVM81tojM7jj0L8um1mtxIyuNNEkScFeSAVKYybpUpmj+5Cw0y1n2BaiAar2HM rXzwA8JB0dZIUK5MtjBvcd5MxnVgt3Vjmu4uVlag= Message-ID: <788cb2e68b98513c84cdc186923f7f99eb55b983.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] tpm: Use kzalloc for allocating only one thing From: James Bottomley To: Zheng Yongjun , peterhuewe@gmx.de, jarkko@kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: jgg@ziepe.ca Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 08:23:49 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20201229135154.23648-1-zhengyongjun3@huawei.com> References: <20201229135154.23648-1-zhengyongjun3@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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