--- Vadim Lobanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 2007-01-07 at 23:29 -0800, Amit Choudhary wrote: > > I do not want to write this but I think that you are arguing just for the > > heck of it. Please > be > > sane. > > No, I'm merely trying to demonstrate, on a logical basis, why the > proposed patch does not (in my opinion) belong within the kernel. The > fact that I'm not alone in voicing such disagreement should mean > something. >
I agree that since couple of people are voicing disagreement the definitely it means something and probably it means that you are right. Let's try to apply the same logic to my explanation: KFREE() macro has __actually__ been used at atleast 1000 places in the kernel by atleast 50 different people. Doesn't that lend enough credibility to what I am saying. People did something like this 1000 times: kfree(x), x = NULL. I simply proposed the KFREE() macro that does the same thing. Resistance to something that is already being done in the kernel. I really do not care whether it goes in the kernel or not. There are lots of other places where I can contribute. But I do not understand the resistance. It is already being done in the kernel. -Amit __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - 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/
