On 2013/5/22 14:06, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 12:49 +0800, Libo Chen wrote:
>> ping...
>
> This is pointless. We routinely avoid adding such crap by having
> the various free(...) routines cope with NULL. You just need to make
> sure you are indeed NULL in the error
On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 12:49 +0800, Libo Chen wrote:
> ping...
This is pointless. We routinely avoid adding such crap by having
the various free(...) routines cope with NULL. You just need to make
sure you are indeed NULL in the error case.
Ben.
> On 2013/5/5 16:38, chenlib...@gmail.com wrote:
>
On 2013/5/22 12:58, Li Zefan wrote:
> On 2013/5/22 12:49, Libo Chen wrote:
>>
>> ping...
>>
>> On 2013/5/5 16:38, chenlib...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> From: Libo Chen
>>>
>>> There is no need to free bcom_eng if kzalloc fail
>>>
>
> kfree(NULL) is fine. We gain nothing from this patch, and it even
On 2013/5/22 12:58, Li Zefan wrote:
On 2013/5/22 12:49, Libo Chen wrote:
ping...
On 2013/5/5 16:38, chenlib...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Libo Chen libo.c...@huawei.com
There is no need to free bcom_eng if kzalloc fail
kfree(NULL) is fine. We gain nothing from this patch, and it even adds
On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 12:49 +0800, Libo Chen wrote:
ping...
This is pointless. We routinely avoid adding such crap by having
the various free(...) routines cope with NULL. You just need to make
sure you are indeed NULL in the error case.
Ben.
On 2013/5/5 16:38, chenlib...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2013/5/22 14:06, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 12:49 +0800, Libo Chen wrote:
ping...
This is pointless. We routinely avoid adding such crap by having
the various free(...) routines cope with NULL. You just need to make
sure you are indeed NULL in the error case.
On 2013/5/22 12:49, Libo Chen wrote:
>
> ping...
>
> On 2013/5/5 16:38, chenlib...@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Libo Chen
>>
>> There is no need to free bcom_eng if kzalloc fail
>>
kfree(NULL) is fine. We gain nothing from this patch, and it even adds one
more line to the code, so just drop thi
ping...
On 2013/5/5 16:38, chenlib...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Libo Chen
>
> There is no need to free bcom_eng if kzalloc fail
>
> Signed-off-by: Libo Chen
> ---
> drivers/dma/bestcomm/bestcomm.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git
ping...
On 2013/5/5 16:38, chenlib...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Libo Chen libo.c...@huawei.com
There is no need to free bcom_eng if kzalloc fail
Signed-off-by: Libo Chen libo.c...@huawei.com
---
drivers/dma/bestcomm/bestcomm.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
On 2013/5/22 12:49, Libo Chen wrote:
ping...
On 2013/5/5 16:38, chenlib...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Libo Chen libo.c...@huawei.com
There is no need to free bcom_eng if kzalloc fail
kfree(NULL) is fine. We gain nothing from this patch, and it even adds one
more line to the code, so just
From: Libo Chen
There is no need to free bcom_eng if kzalloc fail
Signed-off-by: Libo Chen
---
drivers/dma/bestcomm/bestcomm.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dma/bestcomm/bestcomm.c b/drivers/dma/bestcomm/bestcomm.c
index a8c2e29..300ee2d 100644
From: Libo Chen libo.c...@huawei.com
There is no need to free bcom_eng if kzalloc fail
Signed-off-by: Libo Chen libo.c...@huawei.com
---
drivers/dma/bestcomm/bestcomm.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dma/bestcomm/bestcomm.c
12 matches
Mail list logo
