There's explicit protection for free(NULL, M_FOO), but uma_zfree(zone, NULL) will put NULL in the local bucket and then probably return it later from a uma_zalloc call. Obviously it's not a good idea to call uma_zfree(9) on NULL, but in this case it's an easy mistake to make when e.g. converting a set of malloc(9)/free(9) uses into uma(9).
So is the "right" thing to allow a uma_zfree(NULL) and silently succeed, like for free(9)? That would be my guess, but I'm open to alternatives. Thanks, matthew _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
