Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 Feb 2009 21:45:48 +0200 | From | Pekka Enberg <> | Subject | Re: [patch 1/7] slab: introduce kzfree() |
| |
Hi Hugh.
Hugh Dickins wrote: > Thanks for that, I remember it now. > > Okay, that's some justification for kfree(const void *). > > But I fail to see it as a justification for kzfree(const void *): > if someone has "const char *string = kmalloc(size)" and then > wants that string zeroed before it is freed, then I think it's > quite right to cast out the const when calling kzfree().
Quite frankly, I fail to see how kzfree() is fundamentally different from kfree(). I don't see kzfree() as a memset() + kfree() but rather as a kfree() "and make sure no one sees my data". So the zeroing happens _after_ you've invalidated the pointer with kzfree() so there's no "zeroing of buffer going on". So the way I see it, Linus' argument for having const for kfree() applies to kzfree().
That said, if you guys think it's a merge blocker, by all means remove the const. I just want few less open-coded ksize() users, that's all.
Pekka
| |