kfree checks whether the pointer it is passed is NULL. The two foregoing
checks are therefore unnecessary.
This issue was detected using Coccinelle.
Signed-off-by: Bas Peters <[email protected]>
---
fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c | 6 ++----
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c b/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c
index d6c03f7..7d2d817 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c
@@ -1976,8 +1976,7 @@ new_bitmap:
out:
if (info) {
- if (info->bitmap)
- kfree(info->bitmap);
+ kfree(info->bitmap);
kmem_cache_free(btrfs_free_space_cachep, info);
}
@@ -3427,8 +3426,7 @@ again:
if (info)
kmem_cache_free(btrfs_free_space_cachep, info);
- if (map)
- kfree(map);
+ kfree(map);
return 0;
}
--
2.1.0
On Wed, 11 Feb 2015, Bas Peters wrote:
> kfree checks whether the pointer it is passed is NULL. The two foregoing
> checks are therefore unnecessary.
>
> This issue was detected using Coccinelle.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bas Peters <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c | 6 ++----
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c b/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c
> index d6c03f7..7d2d817 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c
> @@ -1976,8 +1976,7 @@ new_bitmap:
>
> out:
> if (info) {
> - if (info->bitmap)
> - kfree(info->bitmap);
> + kfree(info->bitmap);
> kmem_cache_free(btrfs_free_space_cachep, info);
> }
>
> @@ -3427,8 +3426,7 @@ again:
>
> if (info)
> kmem_cache_free(btrfs_free_space_cachep, info);
> - if (map)
> - kfree(map);
> + kfree(map);
A certain lack of parallelism arises in the latter case.
julia
> return 0;
> }
>
> --
> 2.1.0
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
> kfree checks whether the pointer it is passed is NULL. The two foregoing
> checks are therefore unnecessary.
>
> This issue was detected using Coccinelle.
Would you like to integrate my update suggestion "btrfs: Deletion of
unnecessary checks before six function calls"?
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/31/606
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1818924
https://systeme.lip6.fr/pipermail/cocci/2014-October/001321.html
Regards,
Markus
2015-02-11 12:30 GMT+01:00 SF Markus Elfring <[email protected]>:
>> kfree checks whether the pointer it is passed is NULL. The two foregoing
>> checks are therefore unnecessary.
>>
>> This issue was detected using Coccinelle.
>
> Would you like to integrate my update suggestion "btrfs: Deletion of
> unnecessary checks before six function calls"?
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/31/606
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1818924
> https://systeme.lip6.fr/pipermail/cocci/2014-October/001321.html
Oh, I see you already made the exact same change.
I'll just drop my patch in that case.
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/31/606
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1818924
>> https://systeme.lip6.fr/pipermail/cocci/2014-October/001321.html
>
> Oh, I see you already made the exact same change.
Would you like to add any tags to my update suggestion?
Regards,
Markus
Markus,
2015-02-11 13:18 GMT+01:00 SF Markus Elfring <[email protected]>:
>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/31/606
>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1818924
>>> https://systeme.lip6.fr/pipermail/cocci/2014-October/001321.html
>>
>> Oh, I see you already made the exact same change.
>
> Would you like to add any tags to my update suggestion?
No, it's fine, I should've checked before submitting the patch.
>
> Regards,
> Markus