Re: Why is the kfree() argument const?

[Christoph Lameter]

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008, Johannes Weiner wrote:

> is there any reason why kfree() takes a const pointer just to degrade it
> with the call to slab_free()/__cache_free() again?  The promise that the
> pointee is not modified is just bogus in this case, anyway, isn't it?

The object is modified in various cases f.e. because of poisoning or the 
need to store the free pointer. So its bogus, yes. Pekka?


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/