Re: [PATCH 1/4] cpumask: Migrate 'alloc_cpumask_var()' users to 'zalloc_cpumask_var()'

[Rusty Russell]

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Dec 7, 2015 8:13 PM, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> One question: I'll remove all the non-zeroing variants, but would you be
> fine with
>> keeping the 'zalloc' naming? That's consistent with other allocation API
> patterns
>> across the kernel. There won't be any unsafe API left.
>
> Sure, I guess that won't hurt, and we could quietly start deprecating the
> zalloc pattern just to avoid the redundancy in the long run..

I like the zalloc naming, it's clear.  But the series looks fine:

        Acked-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks,
Rusty.
--
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/