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
