[lustre-devel] [PATCH v2] staging/lustre/ptlrpc: Removes potential null dereference
Dan Carpenter
dan.carpenter at oracle.com
Mon May 16 23:53:31 PDT 2016
When I read the code, I just assumed desc was a pointer and it should
have been:
if (!desc)
return NULL;
For me, "if (rc) " is way more readable than "if (rc != 0) ". So
readability could go either way depending on what you're used to, I
suppose.
It should definitely == 0 and != 0 if you are talking about the actual
number zero instead of success/fail like we are here. Also it helps to
use == 0 with strcmp() and friends (although half of the kernel does not
know that trick yet).
The other thing which I have noticed recently is that a lot of
subsystems use a mix of "if (rc) " and "if (rc < 0) ". It's annoying
for Smatch because say a function only returns zero but the some of the
callers check for < 0 and some check for != 0. We can't know for sure
that they are equivalent.
regards,
dan carpenter
More information about the lustre-devel
mailing list