[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150623095704.GO28762@mwanda>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 12:57:04 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc: "devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
"Dilger, Andreas" <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Drokin, Oleg" <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
"lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org" <lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] staging: lustre: fid: Use !x to check for kzalloc
failure
Yes. I know Al's thoughts and kernel style.
But Alan Cox and Andreas have both said they think (x == NULL) can help
you avoid some kind of boolean vs pointer bugs. I've had co-workers who
did massive seds changing !foo to foo == NULL on our code base. But
I've never seen a real life example of a bug this fixes.
To be honest, I've never seen a real life proof that (!foo) code is less
buggy. I should look through the kbuild mailbox... Hm... But my other
idea of setting up code style readability testing website is also a good
one.
Linux kernel style is based on Joe Perches finding that 80% of the code
prefers one way or the other. That's a valid method for determining
code style. I bet it normally picks the more readable style but it
would be interesting to measure it more formally.
regards,
dan carpenter
--
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