Re: [PATCH v6 10/11] cpuidle/powernv: Add support for POWER ISA v3 idle states

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

 <1465404871-5406-11-git-send-email-shreyas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
	
	
 <1465854492.3022.30.camel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
	 <575FE64C.9080107@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: IBM Australia
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.3 (3.20.3-1.fc24) 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On Tue, 2016-06-14 at 16:41 +0530, Shreyas B Prabhu wrote:
> >> +Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â psscr_val = kcalloc(dt_idle_states, sizeof(*psscr_val),
> >> +Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â  GFP_KERNEL);
> >> +Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â rc = of_property_read_u64_array(power_mgt,
> >> +Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â "ibm,cpu-idle-state-psscr",
> >> +Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â psscr_val, dt_idle_states);
> >Â 
> > Here, psscr val is only one u64 ... shouldn't you kmalloc sizeof(..) *
> > dt_idle_states ?
> 
> I'm using kcalloc here since checkpatch script suggested kcalloc over
> kzalloc for allocating memory for arrays.
> I'll also include a patch to use kcalloc throughout the file for
> uniformity in next version. I was originally planning to post that
> cleanup separately.

Ah ok, I missed the use of kcalloc (I didn't even know its existence),
my brain just read kmalloc :-)

Still, I find it inconsistent that you allocate here while you use the
stack for the names. Any reason for that ?

Cheers,
Ben.