On 5/13/22 10:37, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2022 09:45:39 +0200
Steffen Eiden <seiden@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 5/12/22 16:33, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
[snip]
+/*
+ * IOCTL entry point for the Ultravisor device.
+ */
+static long uvio_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
+{
+ void __user *argp = (void __user *)arg;
+ struct uvio_ioctl_cb *uv_ioctl;
+ long ret;
+
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ uv_ioctl = vzalloc(sizeof(*uv_ioctl));
struct uvio_ioctl_cb is rather small, couldn't you just allocate it on
the stack?
IIRC it was on stack in some previous version. We then had a discussion
earlier about this triggered by the inverse comment and decided to not
use the stack.
ok fair enough
but what's the reason for a vzalloc instead of a kzalloc, when the
allocation is surely going to be small?
We had no strong reasons against or for vzalloc/kzalloc.
If you want me to change it to kzalloc I can do it. I still
have no strong opinion on that.
[snip]
