Wolfgang Denk schrieb: > Dear Reinhard Meyer, > > In message <[email protected]> you wrote: >> instead of adding or having the sequence of >> >> malloc(), memset() >> >> in all places where a definitely sane initialized structure >> is required it would make more sense to introduce a single >> function doing both. (The standard "calloc()" does not suit well >> here.) Overall that should even slightly decrease code size. > > And why exactly does calloc() not fit?
It has two parameters... Produces more code to always supply an extra "1"... I am game with using calloc(). That's all. But for malloc() in such driver init situations, another code saving function with error message would be more effective. I don't see any possible way of continuing u-boot when malloc() for a relatively small structure already fails, and a (apparently) needed driver cannot be initialized. I am not talking about malloc()'s for buffers or similar where continuing of u-boot might be possible. Reinhard _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
