[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [2.4] init/do_mounts.c::rd_load_image() memleak
On Fri, 14 Mar 2003 12:05:40 +0200, Denis Vlasenko
<> wrote:

>On 14 March 2003 10:09, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> No that would just be another pointless exercise in causing more
>> annoyance for someone who has to look through patches finding that
>> one hunk that breaks stuff. The recent spelling changes come to mind.
>How we should do such global small cleanups?
>Maybe grep the source and bring the list of affected files
>to maintainers' attention, letting the to gradually push
>changes to Linus...
>I suspect "bring the list to maintainers' attention"
>will be a trickier part ;)
>> But just because you don't seem to have seen any kfree(NULL) in the
>> kernel does not mean they are not there. And should a good trend not
>> allow to grow?
>"if(p) free(p)" => "free(p)" is mostly ok, less code.
>But free is called now unconditionally. Make an exception
>for performance-critical places where p is almost always 0.

The one implementation I looked at carefully (SAS/C) looked like this:

if (p)

if (p) free(p);
if (p)
if (p)

which seems fairly worthless.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.048 / U:0.416 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site