[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1411141130470.2443@hadrien>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 11:31:30 +0100 (CET)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Coccinelle <cocci@...teme.lip6.fr>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Cocci] spatch for trivial pointer comparison style?
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > I don't think that the change is desirable in all cases. There are
> > functions like kmalloc where NULL means failure and !p seems like the
> > reasonable choice. But there maybe other cases where NULL is somehow
> > a meaningful value.
>
> How do you think about to adjust checks for null pointers not only
> in Linux source files but also in other applications?
> Are there any more software design challenges to consider with the
> definition of the preprocessor symbol "NULL"?
Other applications may have other preferences.
julia
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists