On 31.12.09 10:36, Jukka Ruohonen wrote: >>>> + as = malloc(sizeof(*as) * n, M_DEVBUF, M_NOWAIT | M_ZERO); >>> >>> I reckon that there is no reason to prefer malloc(9) instead of kmem(9). >> >> I didn't use kmem(9) since that would require knowing the size of the >> structure on kmem_free(9). > > Ah yes. The size (or 'n') could be recorded, but I am not sure if it is > worth the cause.
In the long run malloc(9) will be replaced by kmem(9).
