From: ecashin@noserose.net
Message-Id: <1111683853.31205@geode.he.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 09:04:13 -0800
To: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
CC: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>, Greg K-H <greg@kroah.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.11] aoe [5/12]: don't try to free null bufpool
References: <87mztbi79d.fsf@coraid.com> <20050317234641.GA7091@kroah.com>
	<1111677437.28285@geode.he.net>
	<1111679884.6290.93.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 968
Lines: 30

Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org> writes:

> On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 07:17 -0800, ecashin@noserose.net wrote:
>> don't try to free null bufpool
>
> in linux there is a "rule" that all memory free routines are supposed to
> also accept NULL as argument, so I think this patch is not needed (and
> even wrong)
>

Hmm.  The mm/mempool.c:mempool_destroy function immediately
dereferences the pointer passed to it:

void mempool_destroy(mempool_t *pool)
{
	if (pool->curr_nr != pool->min_nr)
		BUG();		/* There were outstanding elements */
	free_pool(pool);
}

... so I'm not sure mempool_destroy fits the rule.  Are you suggesting
that the patch should instead modify mempool_destroy?

-- 
  Ed L Cashin <ecashin@coraid.com>
-
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/