On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 8:59 PM, Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On (06/10/15 17:48), Joe Perches wrote: > [..] >> > > > For consistency, tweak zpool_destroy_pool() and NULL-check the >> > > > pointer there. >> > > > >> > > > Proposed by Andrew Morton. >> > > > >> > > > Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxx> >> > > > Reported-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > > > LKML-reference: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/8/583 >> > > >> > > Acked-by: Dan Streetman <ddstreet@xxxxxxxx> >> > >> > Thanks. >> > >> > Shall we ask Joe to add zpool_destroy_pool() to the >> > "$func(NULL) is safe and this check is probably not required" list? >> >> [] >> >> Is it really worth it? >> >> There isn't any use of zpool_destroy_pool preceded by an if >> There is one and only one use of zpool_destroy_pool. >> > > Yes, that's why I asked. I don't think that zpool_destroy_pool() > will gain any significant amount of users soon (well, who knows), > so I'm fine with keeping it out of checkpatch checks. Just checked > your opinion. I really doubt if zpool will be used by anyone other than zswap anytime soon. > > -ss -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>