[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160924140607.41b782fa@kant>
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 14:06:07 +0200
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc: linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] firewire-net: Adjust checks for null pointers in
five functions
On Sep 18 SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> The script "checkpatch.pl" can point information out like the following.
A side note: checkpatch.pl is for authors to help prepare their
submissions of new code (or their refactoring of existing code if for some
reason a refactoring is undertaken).
> Comparison to NULL could be written !…
Yes it could, or it could remain as is. Both styles are used in
drivers/firewire/net.c, so it is indeed preferable to normalize it to one
of them. I keep your patch for the next occasion when related work is
being done on drivers/firewire/net.c or drivers/firewire.
> Thus fix the affected source code places.
It is not a "fix", it is a stylistic change.
> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
> ---
> drivers/firewire/net.c | 16 ++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firewire/net.c b/drivers/firewire/net.c
> index eb7ce5e..e313be3 100644
> --- a/drivers/firewire/net.c
> +++ b/drivers/firewire/net.c
> @@ -366,13 +366,13 @@ static struct fwnet_partial_datagram *fwnet_pd_new(struct net_device *net,
>
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&new->fi_list);
> fi = fwnet_frag_new(new, frag_off, frag_len);
> - if (fi == NULL)
> + if (!fi)
> goto free_new;
[...]
--
Stefan Richter
-======----- =--= ==---
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists