On 10/29/2014 10:38 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 05:26:34PM +0800, pang.xun...@zte.com.cn wrote:
>> The memset in ida_init() already handles idr, so there's some
>> redundancy in the following idr_init().
>>
>> This patch removes the memset, and clears ida->free_bitmap instead.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: pang.xunlei <pang.xun...@zte.com.cn>
>> ---
>> lib/idr.c | 3 +--
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/idr.c b/lib/idr.c
>> index e654aeb..bbe5779 100644
>> --- a/lib/idr.c
>> +++ b/lib/idr.c
>> @@ -1141,8 +1141,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(ida_simple_remove);
>> */
>> void ida_init(struct ida *ida)
>> {
>> - memset(ida, 0, sizeof(struct ida));
>> idr_init(&ida->idr);
>> -
>> + ida->free_bitmap = NULL;
>
> I don't know. Does this matter? If this *really* matters, I'd much
> rather have memset(&ida->FIRST_FIELD, 0, sizeof(struct ida) - offset
> of FIRST_FIELD) to ensure that all fields get reset or implement an
> internal function like __idr_init_without_zeroing(); however, given
> the size of an idr and the low frequency of the operation, I'd prefer
> to just leave it as-is.
>
memset(ptr, 0, sizeof()) or kzalloc() is convenient and good for buffers
but bad for structures, objects...
general way for object initialization is:
xxx_init()
{
explicitly init every field...
/* maybe complicated, over elaborate */
}
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
