Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: kfree(NULL) | From | Pekka Enberg <> | Date | Sat, 22 Apr 2006 18:02:29 +0300 |
| |
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 18:48 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote: > There is a judgement to be made at each call site of kfree (and > similar functions) about whether the argument is rarely NULL, or could > often be NULL. If the janitors have been making this judgement, I > apologise, but I haven't seen them doing that.
I don't think anyone should be calling kfree with NULL pointer often in the first place. Keeping the extra check in place is masking the real problem. So yeah, we should be looking at the NULL checks more carefully to see if they require more fundamental fixes, but no, I don't see why janitors can't continue to remove the extra checks.
Pekka
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |