On Monday 21 March 2005 06:45, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> > > On Monday 21 March 2005 06:02, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday 20 March 2005 06:59, Jesp
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Jesper Juhl wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> > On Monday 21 March 2005 06:02, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > > On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> > > > On Sunday 20 March 2005 06:59, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > > > > Checking a pointer for NULL bef
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> On Monday 21 March 2005 06:02, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> > > On Sunday 20 March 2005 06:59, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > > > Checking a pointer for NULL before calling kfree() on it is redundant,
> > > > kfree
On Monday 21 March 2005 05:49, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> > On Sunday 20 March 2005 06:59, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > > Checking a pointer for NULL before calling kfree() on it is redundant,
> > > kfree() deals with NULL pointers just fine.
> > > This p
On Monday 21 March 2005 06:02, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> > On Sunday 20 March 2005 06:59, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > > Checking a pointer for NULL before calling kfree() on it is redundant,
> > > kfree() deals with NULL pointers just fine.
> > > This patch re
>>...
>
>This is performance critical, so I would like the check to remain. A comment
>may be added in this section.
Hm, if we used Yoshifuji's inline kfree(), you'd get both. A check and a clean
code. (Though I would not move kfree to __kfree, but make the inline variant
explicitly different n
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> On Sunday 20 March 2005 06:59, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > Checking a pointer for NULL before calling kfree() on it is redundant,
> > kfree() deals with NULL pointers just fine.
> > This patch removes such checks from files in drivers/video/
> >
> > Sinc
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> On Sunday 20 March 2005 06:59, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > Checking a pointer for NULL before calling kfree() on it is redundant,
> > kfree() deals with NULL pointers just fine.
> > This patch removes such checks from files in drivers/video/
> >
> > Since
On Sunday 20 March 2005 06:59, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> Checking a pointer for NULL before calling kfree() on it is redundant,
> kfree() deals with NULL pointers just fine.
> This patch removes such checks from files in drivers/video/
>
> Since this is a fairly trivial change (and the same change made
Checking a pointer for NULL before calling kfree() on it is redundant,
kfree() deals with NULL pointers just fine.
This patch removes such checks from files in drivers/video/
Since this is a fairly trivial change (and the same change made
everywhere) I've just made a single patch for all the fi
10 matches
Mail list logo