[RFC: -mm patch] kcalloc(): INT_MAX -> ULONG_MAX
From: Adrian Bunk (bunk_at_stusta.de)
Date: 08/20/05
- Previous message: Peter Zijlstra: "Re: 2.6.13-rc6-rt9"
- Next in thread: Pekka Enberg: "Re: [RFC: -mm patch] kcalloc(): INT_MAX -> ULONG_MAX"
- Maybe reply: Adrian Bunk: "Re: [RFC: -mm patch] kcalloc(): INT_MAX -> ULONG_MAX"
- Reply: Pekka Enberg: "Re: [RFC: -mm patch] kcalloc(): INT_MAX -> ULONG_MAX"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 21:32:37 +0200 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
This change could (at least in theory) allow a compiler better
optimization (especially in the n=1 case).
The practical effect seems to be nearly zero:
text data bss dec hex filename
25617207 5850138 1827016 33294361 1fc0819 vmlinux-old
25617191 5850138 1827016 33294345 1fc0809 vmlinux-patched
Is there any reason against this patch?
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
--- linux-2.6.13-rc6-mm1-full/include/linux/slab.h.old 2005-08-20 04:10:09.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.13-rc6-mm1-full/include/linux/slab.h 2005-08-20 04:11:04.000000000 +0200
@@ -113,7 +113,7 @@
*/
static inline void *kcalloc(size_t n, size_t size, unsigned int __nocast flags)
{
- if (n != 0 && size > INT_MAX / n)
+ if (n != 0 && size > ULONG_MAX / n)
return NULL;
return kzalloc(n * size, flags);
}
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Peter Zijlstra: "Re: 2.6.13-rc6-rt9"
- Next in thread: Pekka Enberg: "Re: [RFC: -mm patch] kcalloc(): INT_MAX -> ULONG_MAX"
- Maybe reply: Adrian Bunk: "Re: [RFC: -mm patch] kcalloc(): INT_MAX -> ULONG_MAX"
- Reply: Pekka Enberg: "Re: [RFC: -mm patch] kcalloc(): INT_MAX -> ULONG_MAX"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|