[as I just wrote to lvm-devel: http://www.redhat.com/archives/lvm-devel/2008-February/msg00017.html ] Jim Meyering <jim@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Since "free (NULL);" is universally safe these days, I propose > to remove all of lvm's redundant "if-before-free" tests. > If no one objects, I'll commit it tonight. > > In case you need more justification than "POSIX requires it", > (understandable, that :-), the following was enough for Wine > development a year and a half ago: > > http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2006-October/031544.html > > Sure, the extra test is not a big deal, but removing it does make the > code slightly smaller, and maybe even more readable (people won't wonder > about the test of such a pointer, when they know that free can handle > a NULL pointer). Same for dm, but here there are only 3: --- dmeventd/old/dmevent.c | 6 ++---- multilog/pthread_lock/pthread_lock.c | 3 +-- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/dmeventd/old/dmevent.c b/dmeventd/old/dmevent.c index 6e9eb46..5d80410 100644 --- a/dmeventd/old/dmevent.c +++ b/dmeventd/old/dmevent.c @@ -220,10 +220,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) out: multilog_del_type(standard); - if (device) - free(device); - if (dso_name) - free(dso_name); + free(device); + free(dso_name); exit(ret); } diff --git a/multilog/pthread_lock/pthread_lock.c b/multilog/pthread_lock/pthread_lock.c index b782301..c52050b 100644 --- a/multilog/pthread_lock/pthread_lock.c +++ b/multilog/pthread_lock/pthread_lock.c @@ -62,7 +62,6 @@ int unlock_fn(void *handle) void destroy_locking(void *handle) { pthread_mutex_t *mutex = (pthread_mutex_t *)handle; - if(mutex) - free(mutex); + free(mutex); } -- 1.5.4.1.98.gf3293 -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
