On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 10:40:03AM +0200, Kai Makisara wrote:
> > Legal, but rather bad taste. Init to NULL, possibly assign the value
> > if kmalloc(), then kfree() unconditionally - sure, but that... almost
> > certainly one hell of a lousy cleanup logics somewhere.
> >
> I agree with you.
>
> However, a few months ago it was advocated to let kfree take care of
> testing the pointer against NULL and a load of patches like this:
That's different - that's _exactly_ the case I've mentioned above.
Moreover, that's exact match to standard behaviour of free(3):
C99 7.20.3.2(2):
The free function causes the space pointed to by ptr to be deallocated, that
is, made available for further allocation. If ptr is a null pointer, no action
occurs. Otherwise, if the argument does not match a pointer returned by the
calloc, malloc, or realloc function, or if the space has been deallocated by
a call to free or realloc, the behaviour is undefined.
IOW, free(NULL) is guaranteed to be no-op while double-free is nasal daemon
country.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
