On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 12:27:08AM +0100, Nikitas Angelinas wrote:
quoted text
> 
> 
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2010, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> 
> > On Aug 22, 2010, at 4:43 PM, Nikitas Angelinas
> > <nikitasangelinas@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > >Replace sizeof(buffer)/sizeof(buffer[0]) with ARRAY_SIZE(buffer) in
> > >kernel/time/timecompare.c
> > >
> > >Signed-off-by: Nikitas Angelinas <nikitasangelinas@googlemail.com>
> > >---
> > >kernel/time/timecompare.c |    5 +++--
> > >1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > >diff --git a/kernel/time/timecompare.c b/kernel/time/timecompare.c
> > >index ac38fbb..a9ae369 100644
> > >--- a/kernel/time/timecompare.c
> > >+++ b/kernel/time/timecompare.c
> > >@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
> > >#include <linux/module.h>
> > >#include <linux/slab.h>
> > >#include <linux/math64.h>
> > >+#include <linux/kernel.h>
> > >
> > >/*
> > >* fixed point arithmetic scale factor for skew
> > >@@ -57,11 +58,11 @@ int timecompare_offset(struct timecompare *sync,
> > >   int index;
> > >   int num_samples = sync->num_samples;
> > >
> > >-    if (num_samples > sizeof(buffer)/sizeof(buffer[0])) {
> > >+    if (num_samples > ARRAY_SIZE(buffer)) {
> > >       samples = kmalloc(sizeof(*samples) * num_samples, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > 
> > That should be kcalloc while you are at it.
> > 
> > Thanks.
> > 
> > -- 
> > Dmitry
> > 
> > 
> 
> Thanks for pointing that out; however, the code as is does not do a
> memset to 0; is it worth using kcalloc in this case considering it has
> to go through an 'unlikely' and a subsequent memset?
> 

Ah, I see. Ignore me then.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/