On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 22:59 +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > On Thu, Jun 08 2017, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > m> wrote: > > The pointer can't be NULL since it's first what has been done in the > > pointer(). > > - if (ZERO_OR_NULL_PTR(addr)) > > - return string(buf, end, NULL, spec); /* NULL > > pointer */ > > - > > - > > Well, ZERO_OR_NULL_PTR checks for a little more than !addr, but I > suppose that if anyone passes the result from kmalloc(0) to %ph, > they'd > better also pass 0 as the size, so the .field_width tests should be > sufficient. If we care about kmalloc(0) check we better to do this in pointer()? > > - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HAVE_CLK) || !clk) > > - return string(buf, end, NULL, spec); > > - > > Well, it may be safe, but removing the IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HAVE_CLK) > check > means that clock() becomes a much bigger function when > !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HAVE_CLK). I return back this in v2. -- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Intel Finland Oy
