> From: Jesper Juhl [mailto:[email protected]]
>
> On 10/13/05, Miller, Mike (OS Dev) <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > I'm not sure I agree that these are pointless checks.
> They're not in
> > the main code path so nothing is lost by checking first.
> What if the
> > pointer is NULL????
> >
>
> If the pointer is NULL then this bit of code in kfree takes
> care of things :
>
> void kfree(const void *objp)
> {
> ...
>
> if (unlikely(!objp))
> return;
> ...
>
> Runtime behaviour is exactely the same.
> kfree checks if the pointer passed to it is NULL in any case
> and just returns if it is.
okay, I'm convinced.
Signed-off-by: Mike Miller <[email protected]>
>
>
> --
> Jesper Juhl <[email protected]>
> Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
> Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
>
-
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]
