From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.223.130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78CF93DB62E for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2026 19:22:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.130 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773429749; cv=none; b=jgWjpKK/IFgLFKEF24VfS8fZq2skS7KSp6kJv7b0IM0oy7EXTORJIPadEdsiTmXtP87P4uxdrEvVTW2/R0r3SlKXPop9IeqK48DHj1ov2iw8hK4S1o9HbO4SGnluiBRNyyr/5dQY6dnEfYkQd611yEGXfsHfOVYogVGR3qompc4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773429749; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pL/j9b13bFh0cZAZJhcCPZn1CaRo1RWOXdOwqzbKEsA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=qorKYTGN79TdVy50GueaIBTpAwNPKbw7BaZGfDR81fDdgUTJnSRrouYcKhSVJT/HYxXibU/xtAy8GNXrJi0jVGLxF/oZPFPnAXHNpnZtd2qXnK4FH7pWEFDPRqpTE1L6WuYEzJf9UhZFD4SWHoeFb67x1oEtZyLzsD91KGgVv+Y= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.cz; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b=cwr9QvSb; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b=K+U59XI2; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b=cwr9QvSb; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b=K+U59XI2; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.130 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.cz Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="cwr9QvSb"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="K+U59XI2"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="cwr9QvSb"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="K+U59XI2" Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (unknown [10.150.64.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B208C4D943; Fri, 13 Mar 2026 19:22:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1773429744; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lEZDbFbdaiqtR0DORmYiMySif6us6CTI89GNtF8koIU=; b=cwr9QvSbf3addifFtJFaEE3S5jwqDpZlb749Rs1kTiqHHQe0wIw+TMnTma/8mfA3QiWv+t IZuKpLsIb+k3xwyZAXuL8F5GTiyGUJh1olDjZfpDExV1+UvdVwgZIIojOm6APRysjO8/lt 9WDXlxlJVmMpUXoO3id4LXjiv7t5UI0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1773429744; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lEZDbFbdaiqtR0DORmYiMySif6us6CTI89GNtF8koIU=; b=K+U59XI2u6gqS+yANGWtG/Pii/V0SpIQQ7wMg6BtOp5KKFcWyvgFtoDkwX90d0NOWdybeR Ua+tdtixGZm/opAA== Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1773429744; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lEZDbFbdaiqtR0DORmYiMySif6us6CTI89GNtF8koIU=; b=cwr9QvSbf3addifFtJFaEE3S5jwqDpZlb749Rs1kTiqHHQe0wIw+TMnTma/8mfA3QiWv+t IZuKpLsIb+k3xwyZAXuL8F5GTiyGUJh1olDjZfpDExV1+UvdVwgZIIojOm6APRysjO8/lt 9WDXlxlJVmMpUXoO3id4LXjiv7t5UI0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1773429744; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lEZDbFbdaiqtR0DORmYiMySif6us6CTI89GNtF8koIU=; b=K+U59XI2u6gqS+yANGWtG/Pii/V0SpIQQ7wMg6BtOp5KKFcWyvgFtoDkwX90d0NOWdybeR Ua+tdtixGZm/opAA== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F14A406AC; Fri, 13 Mar 2026 19:22:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id 6cTyGvBjtGnfZAAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Fri, 13 Mar 2026 19:22:24 +0000 Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2026 20:22:15 +0100 From: David Sterba To: Philipp Hahn Cc: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, apparmor@lists.ubuntu.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, cocci@inria.fr, dm-devel@lists.linux.dev, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, gfs2@lists.linux.dev, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-leds@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-modules@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-phy@lists.infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-sound@vger.kernel.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, ntfs3@lists.linux.dev, samba-technical@lists.samba.org, sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, target-devel@vger.kernel.org, tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, v9fs@lists.linux.dev, Chris Mason , David Sterba Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/61] btrfs: Prefer IS_ERR_OR_NULL over manual NULL check Message-ID: <20260313192215.GH5735@twin.jikos.cz> Reply-To: dsterba@suse.cz References: <20260310-b4-is_err_or_null-v1-0-bd63b656022d@avm.de> <20260310-b4-is_err_or_null-v1-2-bd63b656022d@avm.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260310-b4-is_err_or_null-v1-2-bd63b656022d@avm.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1-rc1 (2014-03-12) X-Spam-Score: -2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.50 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[99.99%]; SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS(1.50)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.30)[dsterba@suse.cz]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FUZZY_RATELIMITED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; R_RATELIMIT(0.00)[to_ip_from(RLk9qejt5hbtemdgupcccnrijf)]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; RCPT_COUNT_GT_50(0.00)[56]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[suse.cz:replyto,imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo]; REPLYTO_ADDR_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; REPLYTO_DOM_NEQ_TO_DOM(0.00)[] X-Spam-Flag: NO On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 12:48:28PM +0100, Philipp Hahn wrote: > Prefer using IS_ERR_OR_NULL() over using IS_ERR() and a manual NULL > check. > > IS_ERR_OR_NULL() already uses likely(!ptr) internally. checkpatch does > not like nesting it: > > WARNING: nested (un)?likely() calls, IS_ERR_OR_NULL already uses > > unlikely() internally > Remove the explicit use of likely(). > > Change generated with coccinelle. > > To: Chris Mason > To: David Sterba > Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: Philipp Hahn Added to for-next, we seem to be using IS_ERR_OR_NULL() already in a few other places so this is makes sense for consistency. Thanks.