From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:48:39 +0000 Subject: Re: USB: serial: Deletion of an unnecessary check before the function call "release_firmware" Message-Id: <546F5ED7.1000206@users.sourceforge.net> List-Id: 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> <546F5831.5060404@users.sourceforge.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Julia Lawall Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Johan Hovold , linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org >> diff --git a/drivers/usb/serial/mxuport.c b/drivers/usb/serial/mxuport.c >> index ab1d690..3653ec1 100644 >> --- a/drivers/usb/serial/mxuport.c >> +++ b/drivers/usb/serial/mxuport.c >> @@ -1101,8 +1101,7 @@ static int mxuport_probe(struct usb_serial *serial, >> */ >> usb_set_serial_data(serial, (void *)id->driver_info); >> out: >> - if (fw_p) >> - release_firmware(fw_p); >> + release_firmware(fw_p); > > I think that the if should stay. I have got an other opinion. > There were two cases on the allocation, so there should be two cases > on the release. I find that this implementation detail does not really matter for the necessity of a null pointer check directly before such a function call. Regards, Markus