Re: [V9fs-developer] [Patch] Dead code in fs/9p/vfs_inode.c

On 6/29/06, Russ Cox <[email protected]> wrote:

>  error:
>         kfree(fcall);
> -       if (ret)
> -               iput(ret);
> -
>         return ERR_PTR(err);
>  }

What about when someone changes the code and does have ret != NULL here?
This seems like reasonable defensive programming to me.

Well, you're not supposed to change code without auditing for things
like this anyway. Also, I fail to see why/how you would change
v9fs_inode_from_fid() for that to happen?  I'd say kill the check.

                                                  Pekka
-
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/

---

• References:
  • [Patch] Dead code in fs/9p/vfs_inode.c
    • From: Eric Sesterhenn <[email protected]>
  • Re: [V9fs-developer] [Patch] Dead code in fs/9p/vfs_inode.c
    • From: "Russ Cox" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Unkillable process in last git -- Bisected
• Next by Date: [PATCH] KConfig: Spellchecking 'similarity' and 'independent'
• Previous by thread: Re: [V9fs-developer] [Patch] Dead code in fs/9p/vfs_inode.c
• Next by thread: Re: [V9fs-developer] [Patch] Dead code in fs/9p/vfs_inode.c
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]