Re: [PATCH] kernel: time: use ARRAY_SIZE macro in timecompare.c

[Nikitas Angelinas]

On Sun, 22 Aug 2010, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:

> On Aug 22, 2010, at 4:43 PM, Nikitas Angelinas
> <nikitasangelinas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >Replace sizeof(buffer)/sizeof(buffer[0]) with ARRAY_SIZE(buffer) in
> >kernel/time/timecompare.c
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Nikitas Angelinas <nikitasangelinas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >---
> >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?

If required, I guess I should post a patch on a separate thread so that
Git picks up the correct patch title?

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