From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:28:10 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP2: Delete unnecessary checks before three function calls Message-Id: <20150716162809.GP17550@atomide.com> List-Id: References: <530CF8FF.8080600@users.sourceforge.net> <530DD06F.4090703@users.sourceforge.net> <5317A59D.4@users.sourceforge.net> <54705EC3.90708@users.sourceforge.net> <55928739.5040809@users.sourceforge.net> <20150716062305.GF17550@atomide.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org * Paul Walmsley [150716 07:09]: > On Wed, 15 Jul 2015, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > * Paul Walmsley [150715 22:58]: > > > Hello Markus > > > > > > On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > > > > > > From: Markus Elfring > > > > Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 14:00:16 +0200 > > > > > > > > The functions clk_disable(), of_node_put() and omap_device_delete() test > > > > whether their argument is NULL and then return immediately. > > > > Thus the test around the call is not needed. > > > > > > > > This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring > > > > > > Thanks for the patch. I have to say, I am a bit leery about applying the > > > omap_device.c and omap_hwmod.c changes, since the called functions -- > > > omap_device_delete() and clk_disable() -- don't explicitly document that > > > NULLs are allowed to be passed in. So there's no explicit contract that > > > callers can rely upon, to (at least in theory) prevent those internal NULL > > > pointer checks from being removed. > > > > > > So I would suggest that those two functions' kerneldoc be patched first to > > > explicitly state that passing in a NULL pointer is allowed. Then I would > > > feel a bit more comfortable applying the omap_device.c and omap_hwmod.c > > > changes. > > > > > > The kerneldoc for of_node_put() does explicitly allow NULLs to be passed > > > in. So I'll apply that change now for v4.3, touching up the commit > > > message accordingly. > > > > I have them applied from a later thread already, but will drop both in > > my branch as I have not pushed them out yet. > > Oops sorry about stepping on your toes - I obviously missed that followup. No problem :) Tony