On (06/10/15 17:48), Joe Perches wrote:
[..]
> > > > For consistency, tweak zpool_destroy_pool() and NULL-check the
> > > > pointer there.
> > > >
> > > > Proposed by Andrew Morton.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhat...@gmail.com>
> > > > Reported-by: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org>
> > > > LKML-reference: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/8/583
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Dan Streetman <ddstr...@ieee.org>
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Shall we ask Joe to add zpool_destroy_pool() to the
> > "$func(NULL) is safe and this check is probably not required" list?
>
> []
>
> Is it really worth it?
>
> There isn't any use of zpool_destroy_pool preceded by an if
> There is one and only one use of zpool_destroy_pool.
>
Yes, that's why I asked. I don't think that zpool_destroy_pool()
will gain any significant amount of users soon (well, who knows),
so I'm fine with keeping it out of checkpatch checks. Just checked
your opinion.
-ss
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
