On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 8:05 PM, Fabio Estevam festevam@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki jagannadha.sutradharudu-teki@xilinx.com wrote:
Squash the malloc()+memset() combo in favor of calloc().
Signed-off-by: Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki jaganna@xilinx.com Cc: Marek Vasut marex@denx.de
drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c | 7 +++++-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c b/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c index 1f1bb36..abdb0ef 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c @@ -381,8 +381,11 @@ int spi_flash_cmd_read_ops(struct spi_flash *flash, u32 offset, }
cmdsz = SPI_FLASH_CMD_LEN + flash->dummy_byte;
cmd = malloc(cmdsz);memset(cmd, 0, cmdsz);
cmd = calloc(1, cmdsz);if (!cmd) {debug("SF: Failed to allocate cmd\n");return ret;Shouldn't you return -ENOMEM instead?
Yes - we can but anyway ret is -1 by default. and sf code doesn't use -ve macros' as of now.