Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755293AbaKSHJE (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Nov 2014 02:09:04 -0500 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.4]:51254 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755227AbaKSHJB (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Nov 2014 02:09:01 -0500 Message-ID: <546C41EF.4040502@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 08:08:31 +0100 From: SF Markus Elfring User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Masami Hiramatsu CC: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , Anil S Keshavamurthy , "David S. Miller" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Coccinelle Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] kprobes: Deletion of an unnecessary check before the function call "module_put" References: <5307CAA2.8060406@users.sourceforge.net> <530A086E.8010901@users.sourceforge.net> <530A72AA.3000601@users.sourceforge.net> <530B5FB6.6010207@users.sourceforge.net> <530C5E18.1020800@users.sourceforge.net> <530CD2C4.4050903@users.sourceforge.net> <530CF8FF.8080600@users.sourceforge.net> <530DD06F.4090703@users.sourceforge.net> <5317A59D.4@users.sourceforge.net> <546899CF.8020808@users.sourceforge.net> <5469B08E.90104@hitachi.com> In-Reply-To: <5469B08E.90104@hitachi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:tfJjuXm+BlPfGve/gpxUGFFR/oUY0M9K2R6Qq9P9hB8RbOXX0T+ /foK9VFlWYfKgeHh4zvLkL359leFKHUz2DuCBN+WIpB1bHrcv9rN3NUIPP6mUffT/UhPlax Kn6kWHIMqjW65Fat9zTocEBqmy7uo872FwYePQ7Lru+l5rlIv2G96XodZBwln0KKfUglGOk vUgQmHHyJsKxGreImIOXw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> index 3995f54..f1e7d45 100644 >> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c >> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c >> @@ -1527,8 +1527,7 @@ int register_kprobe(struct kprobe *p) >> out: >> mutex_unlock(&kprobe_mutex); >> >> - if (probed_mod) >> - module_put(probed_mod); >> + module_put(probed_mod); > > This is OK, but I you request a comment line over there so that > code reader can understand it is safe to pass a NULL pointer to > module_put(). Do you want that I replace the shown null pointer check by a short comment which repeats an expectation for the affected function call? Regards, Markus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/