On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 12:48:17PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Yeah. I started out leaving bad stuff as NULL originally, but over time, 
> as I noticed SIGSEGV's, I mostly changed the ones that I ended up having 
> trigger to &bad_ctype.
> 
> Otherwise we either need to test for NULL all the time (and especially 
> since NULL under _some_ circumstances is ok and means "not evaluated yet", 
> that can be confusing), and having to pass up errors higher and higher up.

I think I run into the exact same situations. It start out as simple
rules "&bad_ctype" means error. But then all the test against NULL need
to change to test against &bad_ctpye as well. It is getting subtle for
some place NULL means not evaluated yet.

Chris

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to