If it's truly nul or a ptr, we don't need to (and shouldn't) check, just call kfree. If it's unitialized, we can't tell anyway and it's a bug -- right?
Am I missing something? On 11/9/06 10:41 PM, "Krishna Kumar2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Though the amso driver (c2_ae_event) is setting the private_data and > private_data_len together for connect request and connect result, so > the check may not be necessary. But if the semantics prefer checking > to make sure, we should follow that (esp if other future drivers may > also simply set private_data_len to zero without modifying > private_data). > > I did it this way since cm_conn_rep_handler() had the same check :) > > thanks, > > - KK > >> I think the semantics are that the pointer is only used if >> private_data_len > 0. Otherwise, it is undefined. So I think we should >> keep the check. Plus I don't like calling kfree() with a NULL pointer. >> It just seems wrong... >> >> ;-) >> >> >> On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 14:59 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote: >>>>> if (iw_event->private_data_len) >>>>> kfree(iw_event->private_data); >>>> >>>> Kfree checks for a null value, so is the private_data_len check > necessary? >>> >>> Could private_data be a junk pointer if private_data_len == 0 ? >>> >>> - R. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openib-general mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general >> >> To unsubscribe, please visit > http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general >> > > > _______________________________________________ > openib-general mailing list > [email protected] > http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general > > To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general > _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
