Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)

> > Here a version of the patch that drops the WARN_ONs
> 
> And now all that's done, how about yet another random person stepping in and
> suggesting NIL or maybe NIL_PTR instead of ZERO_SIZE_PTR?
> 
> I understand the idea is that code need not necesarily care about zero sized
> allocation meaning it won't (generally) need to spell it out but it's still a
> dreadful name... :-(

The name says exactly what it is. It's not at all dreadful. If we're going 
to return a special value in the zero-size case (and in only that case) as 
a valid pointer instead of actually allocating one byte and treating it as 
zero, what we have is...a zero-size pointer. ZERO_SIZE_PTR is a pretty 
damn good name.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)
    • From: Rene Herman <[email protected]>

• References:
  • SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
  • Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
  • Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
  • Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)
    • From: "Pekka Enberg" <[email protected]>
  • Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
  • Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)
    • From: Pekka Enberg <[email protected]>
  • Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
  • Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
  • Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
  • Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)
    • From: Rene Herman <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: RE: 2.6.22-rc: regression: no irda0 interface (2.6.21 was OK), smsc does not find chip
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/1] containers: implement nsproxy containers subsystem
• Previous by thread: Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)
• Next by thread: Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]