Re: ceph: Deletion of unnecessary checks before two function calls

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> dput() also checks for NULL argument, but the check is wrapped into
> unlikely(), which is why I presume it wasn't picked up.  It would be
> great if you could improve your coccinelle script to handle
> {un,}likely() as well.

Thanks for your suggestion.

Should I consider any more fine-tuning for the affected script
"list_input_parameter_validation1.cocci" in the near future?
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/5/362
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.coccinelle/3514


>> @@ -590,15 +589,13 @@ static void queue_realm_cap_snaps(struct ceph_snap_realm
>> *realm)
> 
> The patch was corrupted, that should have been a single line.  I fixed
> it up but you may want to look into your email client settings.

Thanks for your feedback.

Does this example show a conflict between long comments after patch ranges and
line length limitation for email eventually?

Regards,
Markus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux