On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:19 PM, SIMRAN SINGHAL <singhalsimr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Jan Engelhardt <jeng...@inai.de> wrote: >> >> On Tuesday 2017-03-28 18:23, SIMRAN SINGHAL wrote: >>>On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Jan Engelhardt <jeng...@inai.de> wrote: >>>> On Tuesday 2017-03-28 15:13, simran singhal wrote: >>>> >>>>>Some functions like kmalloc/kzalloc return NULL on failure. When NULL >>>>>represents failure, !x is commonly used. >>>>> >>>>>@@ -910,7 +910,7 @@ ip_vs_new_dest(struct ip_vs_service *svc, struct >>>>>ip_vs_dest_user_kern *udest, >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> dest = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ip_vs_dest), GFP_KERNEL); >>>>>- if (dest == NULL) >>>>>+ if (!dest) >>>>> return -ENOMEM; >>>> >>>> This kind of transformation however is not cleanup anymore, it's really >>>> bikeshedding and should be avoided. There are pro and cons for both >>>> variants, and there is not really an overwhelming number of arguments >>>> for either variant to justify the change. >>> >>>Sorry, but I didn't get what you are trying to convey. And particularly pros >>>and >>>cons of both variants. >> >> The ==NULL/!=NULL part sort of ensures that the left side is a pointer, which >> is lost when just using the variable and have it implicitly convert to bool. > > Thanks for the explaination!!!! > > But, according to me we should prefer != NULL over ==NULL according to > coding style.
Sorry their is typing mistake in above. But, according to me we should prefer !var over ( var ==NULL ) according to the coding style
