Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Mar 2005 17:29:56 -0500 (EST) | From | linux-os <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] no need to check for NULL before calling kfree() - fs/ext2/ |
| |
Isn't it expensive of CPU time to call kfree() even though the pointer may have already been freed? I suggest that the check for a NULL before the call is much less expensive than calling kfree() and doing the check there. The resulting "double check" is cheap, compared to the call.
On Fri, 25 Mar 2005, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> (please keep me on CC) > > > kfree() handles NULL fine, to check is redundant. > > Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <juhl-lkml@dif.dk> > > --- linux-2.6.12-rc1-mm3-orig/fs/ext2/acl.c 2005-03-02 08:38:18.000000000 +0100 > +++ linux-2.6.12-rc1-mm3/fs/ext2/acl.c 2005-03-25 22:41:07.000000000 +0100 > @@ -194,8 +194,7 @@ ext2_get_acl(struct inode *inode, int ty > acl = NULL; > else > acl = ERR_PTR(retval); > - if (value) > - kfree(value); > + kfree(value); > > if (!IS_ERR(acl)) { > switch(type) { > @@ -262,8 +261,7 @@ ext2_set_acl(struct inode *inode, int ty > > error = ext2_xattr_set(inode, name_index, "", value, size, 0); > > - if (value) > - kfree(value); > + kfree(value); > if (!error) { > switch(type) { > case ACL_TYPE_ACCESS: > > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >
Cheers, Dick Johnson Penguin : Linux version 2.6.11 on an i686 machine (5537.79 BogoMips). Notice : All mail here is now cached for review by Dictator Bush. 98.36% of all statistics are fiction. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |