From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pd0-x229.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c02::229]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1YDH6h-0002KB-H6 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 18:31:24 +0000 Received: by mail-pd0-f169.google.com with SMTP id g10so4901120pdj.0 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 10:31:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 10:30:57 -0800 From: Brian Norris To: SF Markus Elfring Subject: Re: [PATCH] MTD: Deletion of checks before the function call "iounmap" Message-ID: <20150119183057.GI9759@ld-irv-0074> References: <530CD2C4.4050903@users.sourceforge.net> <530CF8FF.8080600@users.sourceforge.net> <530DD06F.4090703@users.sourceforge.net> <5317A59D.4@users.sourceforge.net> <54BBE87C.9020705@users.sourceforge.net> <20150119175835.GH9759@ld-irv-0074> <54BD4AB6.70708@users.sourceforge.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54BD4AB6.70708@users.sourceforge.net> Cc: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Julia Lawall , Kyungmin Park , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, David Woodhouse List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 07:19:34PM +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > Anyway, I'm essentially saying that I'd like to be 100% sure we have a > > guarantee before dropping all these. > > You can not be absolutely sure. There are various implementation details > which will eventually need further considerations. Let's consider them first. We don't ship code that is missing the implementation details. (At least, we try not to!) > I hope that a reasonable confidence can be achieved here. > > > >> This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. > > > > What script? > > I published scripts for static source code analysis in March 2004. I didn't ask "when?"; where? > > Hand-rolled I guess? > > An extended version found some update candidates in source files for Linux > according to the software development status of "next-20141226". > > My approach is still incomplete at the moment. Then please complete it. Thanks, Brian