Actually the inverse is true- or at least AFAIK, I know for a fact however NULL in C is (void *)0, and i _think_ in c++ its just 0. -- There are only two choices in life. You either conform the truth to your desire, or you conform your desire to the truth. Which choice are you making? On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Kishore A K wrote: > Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 10:44:44 +0530 > From: Kishore A K <kishoreak@xxxxxxxxx> > To: Mandeep Sandhu <mandeep_sandhu@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: kernelnewbies <kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: How is NULL pointer dereference handled inside kernel? > > NULL == 0 in all currently known architectures while coding in > C. And I think NULL == (void *)0 if you code in C++. Infact in > many places in the linux kernel source NULL & 0 have been used > interchangably. > > -- > Kishore A K > > "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." > > > On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 10:27:49 +0530, Mandeep Sandhu > <mandeep_sandhu@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > a basic question. How does the kernel handle NULL pointer > > dereferencing inside kernel space. Supposing I initialise a pointer > > to NULL (i.e 0), and derefernce it then why do I get an oops? > > Is 0 not a valid address? Also I've heard that the value of NULL can > > change from processor to processor (I think on PowerPC 0 is a valid > > address). > > > > TIA, > > -mandeep > > > > -- > > Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel. > > Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/ > > FAQ: http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/ > > > > > > -- > Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel. > Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/ > FAQ: http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/ > > -- Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel. Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/ FAQ: http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/
