From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
To: "zhong jiang" <zhongjiang@huawei.com>,
"Chunming Zhou" <David1.Zhou@amd.com>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@linux.ie>,
"Alex Deucher" <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: drm/amdgpu: remove the redundant null check
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 19:50:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <62b33279-9ca9-5970-5336-a8511ce54197@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1567491305-18320-1-git-send-email-zhongjiang@huawei.com>
> debugfs_remove and kfree has taken the null check in account.
> hence it is unnecessary to check it. Just remove the condition.
How do you think about a wording like the following?
The functions “debugfs_remove” and “kfree” tolerate the passing
of null pointers. Hence it is unnecessary to check such arguments
around the calls. Thus remove the extra condition check at two places.
> No functional change.
I find this information questionable while it is partly reasonable
according to the shown software refactoring.
Can a subject like “[PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Remove two redundant
null pointer checks” be nicer here?
Were any source code analysis tools involved for finding
these update candidates?
Regards,
Markus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-04 17:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-03 6:15 [PATCH] " zhong jiang
2019-09-04 17:50 ` Markus Elfring [this message]
2019-09-05 5:48 ` zhong jiang
2019-09-05 8:38 ` Markus Elfring
2019-09-05 8:46 ` zhong jiang
2019-09-13 21:04 ` Alex Deucher
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=62b33279-9ca9-5970-5336-a8511ce54197@web.de \
--to=markus.elfring@web.de \
--cc=David1.Zhou@amd.com \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=alexander.deucher@amd.com \
--cc=amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zhongjiang@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®