From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
To: Arushi Singhal <arushisinghal19971997@gmail.com>
Cc: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@inai.de>,
Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@blackhole.kfki.hu>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, coreteam@netfilter.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: netfilter: Replace explicit NULL comparisons
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 13:51:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170410115144.GA2155@salvia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+XqjF_8=+GB7oq6wKoxk_+FfPeni+tLaVMAE6k6tP-KOOEi6Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Apr 09, 2017 at 09:12:18AM +0530, Arushi Singhal wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 1:44 AM, Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Apr 08, 2017 at 08:21:56PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> > > On Saturday 2017-04-08 19:21, Arushi Singhal wrote:
> > >
> > > >Replace explicit NULL comparison with ! operator to simplify code.
> > >
> > > I still wouldn't do this, for the same reason as before. Comparing to
> > > NULL explicitly more or less gave an extra guarantee that the other
> > > operand was also a pointer.
> >
> > Arushi, where does it say in the coding style that this is prefered?
>
> This is reported by checkpatch.pl script.
I don't find it in the coding style. I think this is what it stands as
preference in this case IMO. Otherwise, it would be good to get the
kernel coding style document in sync with it, including the reason why
this way to express thing is cleaner. We have to justify the changes.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-10 11:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-08 17:21 [PATCH] net: netfilter: Replace explicit NULL comparisons Arushi Singhal
2017-04-08 18:21 ` Jan Engelhardt
2017-04-08 20:14 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
[not found] ` <CA+XqjF_8=+GB7oq6wKoxk_+FfPeni+tLaVMAE6k6tP-KOOEi6Q@mail.gmail.com>
2017-04-09 8:26 ` Jan Engelhardt
2017-04-09 9:36 ` Liping Zhang
2017-04-10 11:51 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170410115144.GA2155@salvia \
--to=pablo@netfilter.org \
--cc=arushisinghal19971997@gmail.com \
--cc=coreteam@netfilter.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jengelh@inai.de \
--cc=kadlec@blackhole.kfki.hu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).