Skip to contentSkip to conversation

crypto: bcm - set memory to zero only once

PATCH RESEND In review Thorsten Blum 2 participants 3 messages Feb 19, 2025 – Mar 2, 2025 Crypto API

lore
Share & tools
lore

Thorsten Blum

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH RESEND 1/1 crypto: bcm - set memory to zero only once

Use kmalloc_array() instead of kcalloc() because sg_init_table() already sets the memory to zero. This avoids zeroing the memory twice.

Signed-off-by Thorsten Blum <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/crypto/bcm/cipher.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
drivers/crypto/bcm/cipher.c +12 -12
index 9e6798efbfb7..d4da2b5b595f 100644
@@ -140,8 +140,8 @@ spu_skcipher_rx_sg_create(struct brcm_message *mssg,
 	struct iproc_ctx_s *ctx = rctx->ctx;
 	u32 datalen;		/* Number of bytes of response data expected */
 
-	mssg->spu.dst = kcalloc(rx_frag_num, sizeof(struct scatterlist),
-				rctx->gfp);
+	mssg->spu.dst = kmalloc_array(rx_frag_num, sizeof(struct scatterlist),
+				      rctx->gfp);
 	if (!mssg->spu.dst)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 

@@ -204,8 +204,8 @@ spu_skcipher_tx_sg_create(struct brcm_message *mssg,
 	u32 datalen;		/* Number of bytes of response data expected */
 	u32 stat_len;
 
-	mssg->spu.src = kcalloc(tx_frag_num, sizeof(struct scatterlist),
-				rctx->gfp);
+	mssg->spu.src = kmalloc_array(tx_frag_num, sizeof(struct scatterlist),
+				      rctx->gfp);
 	if (unlikely(!mssg->spu.src))
 		return -ENOMEM;
 

@@ -531,8 +531,8 @@ spu_ahash_rx_sg_create(struct brcm_message *mssg,
 	struct scatterlist *sg;	/* used to build sgs in mbox message */
 	struct iproc_ctx_s *ctx = rctx->ctx;
 
-	mssg->spu.dst = kcalloc(rx_frag_num, sizeof(struct scatterlist),
-				rctx->gfp);
+	mssg->spu.dst = kmalloc_array(rx_frag_num, sizeof(struct scatterlist),
+				      rctx->gfp);
 	if (!mssg->spu.dst)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 

@@ -586,8 +586,8 @@ spu_ahash_tx_sg_create(struct brcm_message *mssg,
 	u32 datalen;		/* Number of bytes of response data expected */
 	u32 stat_len;
 
-	mssg->spu.src = kcalloc(tx_frag_num, sizeof(struct scatterlist),
-				rctx->gfp);
+	mssg->spu.src = kmalloc_array(tx_frag_num, sizeof(struct scatterlist),
+				      rctx->gfp);
 	if (!mssg->spu.src)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 

@@ -1076,8 +1076,8 @@ static int spu_aead_rx_sg_create(struct brcm_message *mssg,
 		/* have to catch gcm pad in separate buffer */
 		rx_frag_num++;
 
-	mssg->spu.dst = kcalloc(rx_frag_num, sizeof(struct scatterlist),
-				rctx->gfp);
+	mssg->spu.dst = kmalloc_array(rx_frag_num, sizeof(struct scatterlist),
+				      rctx->gfp);
 	if (!mssg->spu.dst)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 

@@ -1178,8 +1178,8 @@ static int spu_aead_tx_sg_create(struct brcm_message *mssg,
 	u32 assoc_offset = 0;
 	u32 stat_len;
 
-	mssg->spu.src = kcalloc(tx_frag_num, sizeof(struct scatterlist),
-				rctx->gfp);
+	mssg->spu.src = kmalloc_array(tx_frag_num, sizeof(struct scatterlist),
+				      rctx->gfp);
 	if (!mssg->spu.src)
 		return -ENOMEM;
Signature · 1 line
2.48.1
maintainer
#1 lore raw
Quoted 7 lines · Thorsten Blum

Use kmalloc_array() instead of kcalloc() because sg_init_table() already sets the memory to zero. This avoids zeroing the memory twice.

Signed-off-by Thorsten Blum <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/crypto/bcm/cipher.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

This patch has already been applied. Please check whether there is any discrepancy between the applied version and this resend.

Thanks,

Signature · 3 lines
Email: Herbert Xu <[email protected]>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
author
#2 lore raw
Quoted 11 lines · Herbert Xu
Quoted 7 lines · Thorsten Blum

Use kmalloc_array() instead of kcalloc() because sg_init_table() already sets the memory to zero. This avoids zeroing the memory twice.

Signed-off-by Thorsten Blum <[email protected]>

---
drivers/crypto/bcm/cipher.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------

1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

This patch has already been applied. Please check whether there is any discrepancy between the applied version and this resend.

My bad, I must have missed it in -next. The patches are identical.

Thanks,
Thorsten