Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net] octeontx2-af: Initialize bitmap arrays.

From: Simon Horman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 21:01:39 +0000

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 07:56:22AM -0800, Brett Creeley wrote:
> 
> 
> On 1/24/2024 9:06 PM, Ratheesh Kannoth wrote:
> > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
> > 
> > 
> > > From: Brett Creeley <[email-masked]>
> > > Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net] octeontx2-af: Initialize bitmap arrays.
> > > Is there any reason to not use:
> > > 
> > > bitmap_zalloc() and bitmap_free()?
> > Will follow simon's suggestion to keep patch diff minimal. As bitmap_zalloc() does not give any advantage over the other.
> 
> It does make some sense because in multiple places you are open coding
> bitmap_zalloc()->bitmap_alloc() in multiple places.
> 
> For example:
> 
>         mcam->bmap = kmalloc_array(BITS_TO_LONGS(mcam->bmap_entries),
> +                                  sizeof(long), GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO);
> 
> This is exactly what bitmap_zalloc()->bitmap_alloc() are doing.

Yes, I agree and I should have suggested using
bitmap_zalloc() and bitmap_free().