Re: [PATCH 3/6] get_file_rcu(): no need to check for NULL separately

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

To: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] get_file_rcu(): no need to check for NULL separately
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 11:23:10 +0200
Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Christian Brauner <christian@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20240406050033.GC1632446@ZenIV>

On Sat, Apr 06, 2024 at 06:00:33AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> IS_ERR(NULL) is false and IS_ERR() already comes with unlikely()...
> 
> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---

Looks good to me,
Reviewed-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx>

References:
- [PATCHES] misc stuff that should've been pushed in the last window
  - From: Al Viro
- [PATCH 3/6] get_file_rcu(): no need to check for NULL separately
  - From: Al Viro

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2/6] fd_is_open(): move to fs/file.c
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 4/6] kernel_file_open(): get rid of inode argument
Previous by thread: [PATCH 3/6] get_file_rcu(): no need to check for NULL separately
Next by thread: [PATCH 4/6] kernel_file_open(): get rid of inode argument
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux Ext4 Filesystem] [Union Filesystem] [Filesystem Testing] [Ceph Users] [Ecryptfs] [NTFS 3] [AutoFS] [Kernel Newbies] [Share Photos] [Security] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux Cachefs] [Reiser Filesystem] [Linux RAID] [NTFS 3] [Samba] [Device Mapper] [CEPH Development]

Powered by Linux