On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 15:06 +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Wed, 11 Aug 2010, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > > > jbd: Remove redundant NULL check upon kfree(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@xxxxxxx> > > --- > > fs/jbd/transaction.c | 3 +-- > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/jbd/transaction.c b/fs/jbd/transaction.c > > index 5ae71e7..5e98130 100644 > > --- a/fs/jbd/transaction.c > > +++ b/fs/jbd/transaction.c > > @@ -232,8 +232,7 @@ repeat_locked: > > > > lock_map_acquire(&handle->h_lockdep_map); > > out: > > - if (unlikely(new_transaction)) /* It's usually NULL */ > > - kfree(new_transaction); > > + kfree(new_transaction); > > This doesn't seem entirely redundant, as it is optimized (via the > unlikely() hint) for the opposite case than what kfree() is optimized for > (kfree() assumes that the pointer is likely non-NULL, while the code above > assumes that the pointer si likely NULL). > Ok, makes sense. I was a bit doubtful about the unlikely(), thanks for the review. Davidlohr -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
