> If you are convinced that dropping the null tests is a good idea, then you > can submit the patch that makes the change to the relevant maintainers and > mailing lists. Hello, A couple of functions perform input parameter validation before their implementations will try further actions with side effects. Some calling functions perform similar safety checks. Functions which release a system resource are often documented in the way that they tolerate the passing of a null pointer for example. I do not see a need because of this fact that a function caller repeats a corresponding check. Now I would like to propose such a change again. 1. Extension of the infrastructure for the analysis tool "coccicheck" Semantic patch patterns can help to identify update candidates also in the Linux source file hierarchy. https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/tree/scripts/coccinelle?id=79f0345fefaafb7cde301a830471edd21a37989b 2. Clarification for some automated update suggestions My source code search approach found seventy functions at least which might need another review and corresponding corrections for Linux 3.14-rc5. Further software development will point out even more potentially open issues. Regards, Markus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
