On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 01:58:33PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > 'PTR_ERR(p) == -E*' is a stronger condition than IS_ERR(p). > Hence, IS_ERR(p) is unneeded. > > The semantic patch that generates this commit is as follows: > > // <smpl> > @@ > expression ptr; > constant error_code; > @@ > -IS_ERR(ptr) && (PTR_ERR(ptr) == - error_code) > +PTR_ERR(ptr) == - error_code > // </smpl> > > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@xxxxxxxxxx> Any reason for not doing instead: ptr == ERR_PTR(-error_code) ? To me it seems weird to use PTR_ERR() on non-error pointers. I even had to double check that it returns a 'long' and not an 'int'. (If it returned an 'int', it wouldn't work...) - Eric
