From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752790AbXGNEw5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Jul 2007 00:52:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751327AbXGNEws (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Jul 2007 00:52:48 -0400 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.178]:49481 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751139AbXGNEwr (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Jul 2007 00:52:47 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=QyLIpT/u0nwIo+y5Vjs2WEfqAmhbxNfQn48/m81FNDujRk+r+9yLOb3EhaHwmCeMlYf1ykWFFHifHs+93ORdk4/171fYpt4tOzoYsGIk6iSEpPKOZMXsKgnfdBN63nXYSNW3480QoXXHuIpDKsUJdi9tHSKHAe+nWFxRMHZ6nhw= Message-ID: <4698569A.7010904@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 13:52:42 +0900 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070307) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Satyam Sharma CC: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki , gregkh@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 24/61] sysfs: make sysfs_put() ignore NULL sd References: <11841968512510-git-send-email-gregkh@suse.de> <20070712.085047.37780825.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> <20070711235529.GA7485@suse.de> <20070712.100617.14203407.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> <46959958.6080005@gmail.com> <4696FDDC.7050503@gmail.com> <4697078D.4050601@gmail.com> <46983C76.1040406@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, Satyam Sharma wrote: > Anyway, we've wasted enough time and bandwidth discussing this > (relatively trivial) matter, and I know nobody's mind is changed after > the end of it all (at least mine won't), so I suggest let's stop. The > proposed change is in Greg's tree already, and if he's fine with it, > then there's not much to do about it, is there :-) I have no problem regenerating the patchset without this allow-NULL patch but as I said, I see it as an improvement and we'll have to agree to disagree on that point. But, if you think NULL get/put() are bad, please go ahead and change things. As long as things stay consistent, I'm okay with, well, even slightly prefer not allowing NULL. Thanks. :-) -- tejun