int i;
int ret;
- printk(\ntesting speed of %s\n, algo);
+ printk(KERN_INFO \ntesting speed of %s\n, algo);
Wouldn't it be better to take the first \n out as well??
--
-
Thiago Galesi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-crypto in
the
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 02:48:19PM +0100, Frank Seidel wrote:
From: Frank Seidel fr...@f-seidel.de
Applying kernel janitors todos (printk calls need KERN_*
constants on linebeginnings, reduce stack footprint where
possible) to tcrypts test_hash_speed (where stacks
memory footprint was very
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, Frank Seidel wrote:
Wel...
Using kmalloc() increases code size, makes the code more complex, and
increases
the risk of introducing a memory leak now or later.
Ok, admitted.
I just stumbled over tcrypt on the make checkstack output and as
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 03:34:11PM +0100, Frank Seidel wrote:
Thiago Galesi wrote:
If you write static char output[1024]; (even inside a function) it's
not allocated on the stack.
Oh, yes i misunderstood Herbert, sorry. But anyway isn't
it preferred to kmalloc such arrays?
Greg, i
