Quoting SF Markus Elfring (elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx):
> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2017 16:16:05 +0200
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>
> The script “checkpatch.pl” pointed information out like the following.
>
> Comparison to NULL could be written …
... could be written all sorts of ways. But what's the advantage of this?
Personally I find "x == NULL" easier to read, and AFAIK psychology backs me
up on the idea that negation is harder on the brain and worth avoiding when
possible.
> Thus fix affected source code places.
>
> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> security/selinux/ss/ebitmap.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/selinux/ss/ebitmap.c b/security/selinux/ss/ebitmap.c
> index 697bd748760a..c778135989f5 100644
> --- a/security/selinux/ss/ebitmap.c
> +++ b/security/selinux/ss/ebitmap.c
> @@ -96,12 +96,12 @@ int ebitmap_netlbl_export(struct ebitmap *ebmap,
> unsigned int iter;
> int rc;
>
> - if (e_iter == NULL) {
> + if (!e_iter) {
> *catmap = NULL;
> return 0;
> }
>
> - if (*catmap != NULL)
> + if (*catmap)
> netlbl_catmap_free(*catmap);
> *catmap = NULL;
>
> @@ -161,14 +161,14 @@ int ebitmap_netlbl_import(struct ebitmap *ebmap,
> continue;
> }
>
> - if (e_iter == NULL ||
> + if (!e_iter ||
> offset >= e_iter->startbit + EBITMAP_SIZE) {
> e_prev = e_iter;
> e_iter = kmem_cache_zalloc(ebitmap_node_cachep, GFP_ATOMIC);
> - if (e_iter == NULL)
> + if (!e_iter)
> goto netlbl_import_failure;
> e_iter->startbit = offset - (offset % EBITMAP_SIZE);
> - if (e_prev == NULL)
> + if (!e_prev)
> ebmap->node = e_iter;
> else
> e_prev->next = e_iter;
> --
> 2.14.0
