[PATCH v2] staging: fluke_gpib: use kzalloc instead of kmalloc + memset

Tomasz Sadowski posted 1 patch 5 days, 1 hour ago
There is a newer version of this series
drivers/staging/gpib/eastwood/fluke_gpib.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
[PATCH v2] staging: fluke_gpib: use kzalloc instead of kmalloc + memset
Posted by Tomasz Sadowski 5 days, 1 hour ago
v2:
 - Add proper commit description
 - No changes in patch

Use kzalloc() instead of kmalloc() + memset() to simplify memory allocation.

Also use sizeof(*board->private_data) instead of repeating the struct name.
This avoids duplication and keeps the code correct if the struct name
changes in the future.

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Sadowski <tsdwski@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/gpib/eastwood/fluke_gpib.c | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/gpib/eastwood/fluke_gpib.c b/drivers/staging/gpib/eastwood/fluke_gpib.c
index 3ae848e3f738..2b6ba7882dba 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/gpib/eastwood/fluke_gpib.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/gpib/eastwood/fluke_gpib.c
@@ -853,11 +853,10 @@ static int fluke_allocate_private(struct gpib_board *board)
 {
 	struct fluke_priv *priv;
 
-	board->private_data = kmalloc(sizeof(struct fluke_priv), GFP_KERNEL);
+	board->private_data = kzalloc(sizeof(*board->private_data), GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!board->private_data)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 	priv = board->private_data;
-	memset(priv, 0, sizeof(struct fluke_priv));
 	init_nec7210_private(&priv->nec7210_priv);
 	priv->dma_buffer_size = 0x7ff;
 	priv->dma_buffer = kmalloc(priv->dma_buffer_size, GFP_KERNEL);
-- 
2.52.0
Re: [PATCH v2] staging: fluke_gpib: use kzalloc instead of kmalloc + memset
Posted by Dan Carpenter 4 days, 16 hours ago
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 09:45:49PM +0100, Tomasz Sadowski wrote:
> v2:
>  - Add proper commit description
>  - No changes in patch
> 

This stuff needs to go under the --- cut off line.

> Use kzalloc() instead of kmalloc() + memset() to simplify memory allocation.
> 
> Also use sizeof(*board->private_data) instead of repeating the struct name.
> This avoids duplication and keeps the code correct if the struct name
> changes in the future.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Sadowski <tsdwski@gmail.com>
> ---
  ^^^

Here.

regards,
dan carpenter