Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 Nov 2007 12:06:51 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] - TPM device driver layer (tpm.c|h) - 2nd repost |
| |
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 13:32:06 +0100 Richard MUSIL <richard.musil@st.com> wrote:
> >> + if (chip->vendor.release) > >> + chip->vendor.release(dev); > >> + > >> + /* it *should* be: chip->release != NULL */ > > > > And that one's actually wrong in the context of kernel coding practices. > > But whatever. > > Well I am not sure, what is exactly against coding practices (this is > my first patch, so bear with me). Was it the comment? Or the "likely".
The code was
/* it *should* be: chip->release != NULL */ if (chip->release)
and the I took the comment to mean that it should be
if (chip->release != NULL)
I was just pointing out that the test-pointer-as-truth-value trick is smiled upon in kernel coding.
> But, anyway, I guess I was a bit paranoic. chip->release is set to > original device::release and this should be set to platform_device_release > at least (and if someone messed with it, it should not be NULL anyway). > So I removed complete condition.
From the above it appears that the code comment misled me. - 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/
| |