On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed 25-01-17 12:15:59, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 01/24/2017 04:00 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> > > > Well, I am not opposed to kvmalloc_array but I would argue that this
>> > > > conversion cannot introduce new overflow issues. The code would have
>> > > > to be broken already because even though kmalloc_array checks for the
>> > > > overflow but vmalloc fallback doesn't...
>> > >
>> > > Yeah I agree, but if some of the places were really wrong, after the
>> > > conversion we won't see them anymore.
>> > >
>> > > > If there is a general interest for this API I can add it.
>> > >
>> > > I think it would be better, yes.
>> >
>> > OK, fair enough. I will fold the following into the original patch. I
>> > was little bit reluctant to create kvcalloc so I've made the original
>> > callers more talkative and added | __GFP_ZERO.
>>
>> Fair enough,
>>
>> > To be honest I do not
>> > really like how kcalloc...
>>
>> how kcalloc what?
>
> how kcalloc hides the GFP_ZERO and the name doesn't reflect that.
The userspace calloc() is specified to zero memory, so I'd say the name
does reflect that.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
