Re: kfree(0) - ok? — Linux Kernel

On 8/18/07, Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> wrote:
> That was merged over my objections. IMHO ksize(NULL) should fail since we
> are determining the size of an unallocated object.

Agreed, especially as we have real zero-sized objects returned from
kmalloc() et al now.
-
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/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: kfree(0) - ok?
  - From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
- Re: kfree(0) - ok?
  - From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>

References:
- kfree(0) - ok?
  - From: Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com>
- Re: kfree(0) - ok?
  - From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
- Re: kfree(0) - ok?
  - From: Satyam Sharma <satyam@infradead.org>
- Re: kfree(0) - ok?
  - From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
- Re: kfree(0) - ok?
  - From: Satyam Sharma <satyam@infradead.org>
- Re: kfree(0) - ok?
  - From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>

Prev by Date: Re: kfree(0) - ok?
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 02/12] Blackfin arch: Add label to call new GPIO API
Previous by thread: Re: kfree(0) - ok?
Next by thread: Re: kfree(0) - ok?
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]