Re: [PATCH] crypto_free_tfm callers do not need to check for NULL

On Tue, 2005-08-30 at 22:45 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> Since the patch to add a NULL short-circuit to crypto_free_tfm() went in, 
> there's no longer any need for callers of that function to check for NULL.
> This patch removes the redundant NULL checks and also a few similar checks
> for NULL before calls to kfree() that I ran into while doing the 
> crypto_free_tfm bits.
> 
> I've posted similar patches in the past, but was asked to first until the
> short-circuit patch moved from -mm to mainline - and since it is now 
> firmly there in 2.6.13 I assume there's no problem there anymore.
> I was also asked previously to make the patch against mainline and not -mm,
> so this patch is against 2.6.13.
> 
> Feedback, ACK, NACK, etc welcome. 

sctp change looks fine.
A similar check in sctp_endpoint_destroy() can also be removed.

Thanks
Sridhar

-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] crypto_free_tfm callers do not need to check for NULL
    • From: Jesper Juhl <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] crypto_free_tfm callers do not need to check for NULL
    • From: Jesper Juhl <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Very strange Marvell/Yukon Gigabit NIC networking problems
• Next by Date: [PATCH] New SBC8360 watchdog driver (revised)
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] crypto_free_tfm callers do not need to check for NULL
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] crypto_free_tfm callers do not need to check for NULL
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]