[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <547BC5AD.6090500@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2014 02:34:37 +0100
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To: Lino Sanfilippo <LinoSanfilippo@....de>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
backports@...r.kernel.org
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>
Subject: Re: net-PA Semi: Deletion of unnecessary checks before the function
call "pci_dev_put"
> I know there has been some criticism about those kind of "code
> improvements" already but i would like to point out just one more thing:
>
> Some of those NULL pointer checks on input parameters may have been
> added subsequently to functions. So there may be older kernel versions
> out there in which those checks dont exists in some cases. If some of
> the now "cleaned up" code is backported to such a kernel chances are
> good that those missing checks are overseen. And then neither caller nor
> callee is doing the NULL pointer check.
I guess that the Coccinelle software can also help you in this use case.
How do you think about to shield against "unwanted" or unexpected collateral
evolutions with additional inline functions?
I assume that a few backporters can tell you more about their corresponding
software development experiences.
http://www.do-not-panic.com/2014/04/automatic-linux-kernel-backporting-with-coccinelle.html
Regards,
Markus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists