On Fri, 8 Apr 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Jesper Juhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > General rule (as I understand it) is that functions that free resources
> > should handle being passed NULL pointers - mempool_destroy() will
> > currently explode if passed a NULL pointer, the patch
Jesper Juhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> General rule (as I understand it) is that functions that free resources
> should handle being passed NULL pointers - mempool_destroy() will
> currently explode if passed a NULL pointer, the patch below makes it safe
> to pass it NULL.
The best
General rule (as I understand it) is that functions that free resources
should handle being passed NULL pointers - mempool_destroy() will
currently explode if passed a NULL pointer, the patch below makes it safe
to pass it NULL.
Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
mempool.c |
General rule (as I understand it) is that functions that free resources
should handle being passed NULL pointers - mempool_destroy() will
currently explode if passed a NULL pointer, the patch below makes it safe
to pass it NULL.
Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
mempool.c |
Jesper Juhl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
General rule (as I understand it) is that functions that free resources
should handle being passed NULL pointers - mempool_destroy() will
currently explode if passed a NULL pointer, the patch below makes it safe
to pass it NULL.
The best response to
On Fri, 8 Apr 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
Jesper Juhl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
General rule (as I understand it) is that functions that free resources
should handle being passed NULL pointers - mempool_destroy() will
currently explode if passed a NULL pointer, the patch below makes
6 matches
Mail list logo