On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 9:27 PM Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 13.01.2023 21:47, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 8:41 PM Alexey Khoroshilov > > <khoroshilov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 13.01.2023 16:33, Anastasia Belova wrote: > > > >> It seems it is better to put the whole validation loop under if (rsp) > >> check. > > > > No. The entire patch is redundant. > > The code that calls this function is under the control of the same > > driver, so we know how to avoid shooting in our foot. > > I see, there is an assumption that response is NULL iff size is zero. Yes. ->read() is called with (NULL, 0) and the code copes with this. A similar situation was discussed recently and Linus T. rejected a proposed change in vsnprintf(). > May be it could be documented, because naming of arguments does not make > such assumption obvious for fresh readers. Documentation improvements are always appreciated! -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
