On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 12:02:28PM +0200, walter harms wrote:
>
> Am 24.06.2015 22:48, schrieb SF Markus Elfring:
> > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 22:40:30 +0200
> >
> > The kfree() function tests whether its argument is NULL and then
> > returns immediately. Thus the test around the call is not needed.
> >
> > This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/s390/kernel/process.c | 3 +--
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/process.c b/arch/s390/kernel/process.c
> > index dc5edc2..22e6448 100644
> > --- a/arch/s390/kernel/process.c
> > +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/process.c
> > @@ -81,8 +81,7 @@ void release_thread(struct task_struct *dead_task)
> >
> > void arch_release_task_struct(struct task_struct *tsk)
> > {
> > - if (tsk->thread.vxrs)
> > - kfree(tsk->thread.vxrs);
> > + kfree(tsk->thread.vxrs);
> > }
This code will be changed soon anyway. So it would be rather pointless
to apply your patch now. Thanks anyway!
> > int copy_thread(unsigned long clone_flags, unsigned long new_stackp,
> maybe the intention was to check tsk != NULL ?
No.
--
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
