On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 20:53, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 08:46:17PM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
>> Oh, those macros are nice. I updated the patch to use them instead,
>> except for one case where the usage didn't fit the XCNEW(VEC) API and
>> I used xcalloc directly instead.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 08:46:17PM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> Oh, those macros are nice. I updated the patch to use them instead,
> except for one case where the usage didn't fit the XCNEW(VEC) API and
> I used xcalloc directly instead. Here's what I committed:
For that remaining case there
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:46, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:41:33AM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 23:50, Steve Kargl
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:41:33PM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> the attached patch replaces gf
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:41:33AM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 23:50, Steve Kargl
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:41:33PM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> the attached patch replaces gfc_getmem with calls to xcalloc (from
> >> libiberty). Apart f
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 23:50, Steve Kargl
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:41:33PM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> the attached patch replaces gfc_getmem with calls to xcalloc (from
>> libiberty). Apart from reducing duplicated code, calloc is better than
>> malloc + memset, as the
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:41:33PM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the attached patch replaces gfc_getmem with calls to xcalloc (from
> libiberty). Apart from reducing duplicated code, calloc is better than
> malloc + memset, as the allocator knows that the kernel always gives
> out zeroed
