[U-Boot] RFC: introduce malloc_cleared() ?

[Reinhard Meyer]

Wolfgang Denk schrieb:
> Dear Reinhard Meyer,
> 
> In message <4CB6A110.6080101 at emk-elektronik.de> you wrote:
>> instead of adding or having the sequence of
>>
>> malloc(), memset()
>>
>> in all places where a definitely sane initialized structure
>> is required it would make more sense to introduce a single
>> function doing both. (The standard "calloc()" does not suit well
>> here.) Overall that should even slightly decrease code size.
> 
> And why exactly does calloc() not fit?

It has two parameters... Produces more code to always supply an
extra "1"...

I am game with using calloc(). That's all.

But for malloc() in such driver init situations, another code saving
function with error message would be more effective. I don't see any
possible way of continuing u-boot when malloc() for a relatively small
structure already fails, and a (apparently) needed driver cannot be
initialized.

I am not talking about malloc()'s for buffers or similar where continuing
of u-boot might be possible.

Reinhard