lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Assuming NULL
Hi Jan,

On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 06:24:22PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
(...)
> My question is: Which one is right wrt the case "i_op ==/!= NULL"?
> There are two ways:
>
> - the kernel assumes i_op (and similar) is always non-NULL
> => then we can remove a lot of checks, like the first example above
>
> - the kernel does not assume...
> => then we need some extra checks, like in the second example above

and in any case, adding a comment telling why it CAN or why it CANNOT
be NULL would prevent other people from having to redo the same work
in 6 months.

Willy

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-06-11 19:28    [W:0.031 / U:2.532 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site