Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 15 Mar 2003 14:35:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 15 Mar 2003 14:35:30 -0500 Received: from inti.inf.utfsm.cl ([200.1.21.155]:54483 "EHLO inti.inf.utfsm.cl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 15 Mar 2003 14:35:29 -0500 Message-Id: <200303151840.h2FIe7Ff005637@eeyore.valparaiso.cl> To: Jens Axboe cc: Oleg Drokin , Oleg Drokin , alan@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@math.psu.edu Subject: Re: [2.4] init/do_mounts.c::rd_load_image() memleak In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 14 Mar 2003 09:09:11 +0100." <20030314080911.GY836@suse.de> Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 14:40:07 -0400 From: Horst von Brand Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1165 Lines: 30 Jens Axboe said: > On Fri, Mar 14 2003, Oleg Drokin wrote: [...] > > Do you propose somebody should go and fix all > > if ( something ) > > kfree(something); > > pieces of code to read just > > kfree(something); ? > No that would just be another pointless exercise in causing more > annoyance for someone who has to look through patches finding that one > hunk that breaks stuff. The recent spelling changes come to mind. By that standard, most janitorial patches should be ditched. That way, no cruft will ever be removed. Instead of this extremist position, some way should be found that minimizes this kind of friction. -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513 - 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/