From: "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org>
To: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [KJ][PATCH] kj-devel.pl - comments
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 19:31:28 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42470A10.8060904@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200503271134.15777.vicente.feito@gmail.com>
Vicente Feito wrote:
> Great!
> I'll implement those, I was also thinking on implementing this kind of
> checking:
> if (p)
> kfree(p);
> (since kfree deals with null pointers as well)
>
> I'm not sure because some people think that is more expensive to make the call
> than the check, arguing between branch prediction vs stack overhead is common
> in lkml afaik, which one do you think is better?(Other people is free to go
> here as well:)
That debate is still raging, but it would be OK to check for it
and print a warning IMO.
> I'm thinking on adding checks for intermodule and taskqueues, I don't know how
> people feel about it but I believe is time to do it, since they are
> deprecated but still in some places.
If it's deprecated, I agree that a warning should be printed.
Here's another common problem/misuse (from a patch today):
this patch fix 3 calls to module_param_string() in
driver/media/video/tuner-core.c and drivers/media/video/tda9887.c.
In all three places, the len and the perm parameter was switched.
Patch is against 2.6.12-rc1.
Signed-off-by: Bert Wesarg <wesarg@informatik.uni-halle.de>
diff -uprN linux-2.6.12-rc1.orig/drivers/media/video/tda9887.c
linux-2.6.12-rc1/drivers/media/video/tda9887.c
--- linux-2.6.12-rc1.orig/drivers/media/video/tda9887.c 2005-03-27
14:44:23.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.12-rc1/drivers/media/video/tda9887.c 2005-03-27
14:48:06.000000000 +0200
@@ -478,9 +478,9 @@ static int tda9887_set_pinnacle(struct t
/*
---------------------------------------------------------------------- */
static char pal[] = "-";
-module_param_string(pal, pal, 0644, sizeof(pal));
+module_param_string(pal, pal, sizeof(pal), 0644);
static char secam[] = "-";
-module_param_string(secam, secam, 0644, sizeof(secam));
+module_param_string(secam, secam, sizeof(secam), 0644);
static int tda9887_fixup_std(struct tda9887 *t)
{
diff -uprN linux-2.6.12-rc1.orig/drivers/media/video/tuner-core.c
linux-2.6.12-rc1/drivers/media/video/tuner-core.c
--- linux-2.6.12-rc1.orig/drivers/media/video/tuner-core.c 2005-03-27
14:44:23.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.12-rc1/drivers/media/video/tuner-core.c 2005-03-27
14:47:17.000000000 +0200
@@ -162,7 +162,7 @@ static void set_type(struct i2c_client *
}
static char pal[] = "-";
-module_param_string(pal, pal, 0644, sizeof(pal));
+module_param_string(pal, pal, sizeof(pal), 0644);
--
~Randy
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors
prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-03-27 19:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-03-27 11:34 [KJ][PATCH] kj-devel.pl - comments Vicente Feito
2005-03-27 19:31 ` Randy.Dunlap [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=42470A10.8060904@osdl.org \
--to=rddunlap@osdl.org \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.