lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jan]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH -next] tpm: Use kzalloc for allocating only one thing
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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-01-05 07:00    [W:0.044 / U:0.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site