linux-kernel - Re: [patch 119/197] scripts/coccinelle/free: Delete NULL test before freeing functions?

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]

Message-ID: <53E5E656.1000606@users.sourceforge.net>
Date:	Sat, 09 Aug 2014 11:13:58 +0200
From:	SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Coccinelle <cocci@...teme.lip6.fr>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 119/197] scripts/coccinelle/free: Delete NULL test before
 freeing functions?

> I still don't think this should be done for any random function that 
> performs a null test on its argument.  The corrections involved here are 
> not as trivial as they would seem.

I would prefer to make the list of corresponding function names more complete.


> Often it is not the case that the null test at the call site should be
> just deleted, instead the code should be reorganized.

Which source code places do you know where a different approach might look better?


> (Personally, I don't like the whole null test removal idea. [...]

Would you like to clarify involved software concerns a bit more?

Regards,
Markus
--
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/