linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/m68k

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:56:38 +0200
From:	Petr Stehlik <pstehlik@...hics.cz>
To:	Yoann Padioleau <padator@...adoo.fr>
CC:	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, geert@...ux-m68k.org,
	zippel@...ux-m68k.org, linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/m68k

Yoann Padioleau wrote:
> When comparing a pointer, it's clearer to compare it to NULL than to 0.

>  	stram_start = phys_to_virt(0);
> -	kernel_in_stram = (stram_start == 0);
> +	kernel_in_stram = (stram_start == NULL);

stram_start is more like an offset than pointer, IMHO. And 0 is a valid 
offset. The "==NULL" does not make much sense in this particular case. 
NULL is usually used when checking for an uninitialized pointer, right?

Petr

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/