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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:12:21 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7 net-2.6.26] [TIPC]: Remove inlining of reference
 table locking routines

From: "Stephens, Allan" <>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 07:06:21 -0700

> Does your preference for use of the "!ptr" style also apply to
> non-pointer variables?  (For example, do you also prefer to see
> "!count" rather than "count == 0"?)  I'm asking because I've
> received conflicting guidance in the past (not from you, of course),
> which gave me the impression that the "ptr == NULL" form was the way
> the Linux kernel gatekeepers wanted to see things done.

I'm mostly ambivalent about that particular case.

But if I had to choose I'd say use "== 0" because
that is an easy way to visually distinguish pointer
NULL checks vs. integer zero ones without having
to know or see the type of the variable.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists