On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 06:43:48PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 18:29:24 +0200 Danilo Krummrich <dakr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Besides the obvious (and desired) difference between krealloc() and > > kvrealloc(), there is some inconsistency in their function signatures > > and behavior: > > > > - krealloc() frees the memory when the requested size is zero, whereas > > kvrealloc() simply returns a pointer to the existing allocation. > > The old kvrealloc() behavior actually sounds somewhat useful. You've > checked that no existing sites were relying on this? Yes, I did. > > And that all existing kvrealloc() callers were (incorrectly) checking > for NULL? Seems that way. You mean for the initial allocation? Yes, but I also noticed that as long as the old kvrealloc() is called with p == NULL and oldsize == 0 it should work as well.
