-
Greg Kroah-Hartman authored
This reverts commit 22072e83 as it is broken. Alan writes: What you can't see just from reading the patch is that in both cases (ehci->itd_pool and ehci->sitd_pool) there are two allocation paths -- the two branches of an "if" statement -- and only one of the paths calls dma_pool_[z]alloc. However, the memset is needed for both paths, and so it can't be eliminated. Given that it must be present, there's no advantage to calling dma_pool_zalloc rather than dma_pool_alloc. Reported-by: Erick Cafferata <erick@cafferata.me> Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> Cc: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
43b78f11