From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751417AbaHIJOK (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Aug 2014 05:14:10 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.11]:62564 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751266AbaHIJOE (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Aug 2014 05:14:04 -0400 Message-ID: <53E5E656.1000606@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2014 11:13:58 +0200 From: SF Markus Elfring User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julia Lawall CC: Andrew Morton , Coccinelle , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Fabian Frederick , Joe Perches Subject: Re: [patch 119/197] scripts/coccinelle/free: Delete NULL test before freeing functions? References: <53e53fd1.zO3IbUqJ421c7VXf%akpm@linux-foundation.org> <53E5DA60.90902@users.sourceforge.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:crVygnKWByqmN0xHLgMZ0m2ZehFw2OaB3WP48Pz//Ncx/ULJXdW OtUQ0+ffrzqYintT8zRLL44T4SBCABCpGd+deOk5zTD7zVt3SNSa2/5mRwO0dyO92aiQf27 7QGTgDF2OOYAqb0Jkjtt+CW7Gbzc9MJPEWcjBzxpnd46S0Vv3Fk4s5FH891t2aLJ8ttqvOK 9BzKt7MSlCUPI+4KV6UDw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I still don't think this should be done for any random function that > performs a null test on its argument. The corrections involved here are > not as trivial as they would seem. I would prefer to make the list of corresponding function names more complete. > Often it is not the case that the null test at the call site should be > just deleted, instead the code should be reorganized. Which source code places do you know where a different approach might look better? > (Personally, I don't like the whole null test removal idea. [...] Would you like to clarify involved software concerns a bit more? Regards, Markus