Re: [PATCH V2] checkpatch: Add some <foo>_destroy functions to NEEDLESS_IF tests

From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] checkpatch: Add some <foo>_destroy functions to NEEDLESS_IF tests
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 09:27:43 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150715002743.GB742@swordfish> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150714160300.e59bec100e2ba090bc5e2107@linux-foundation.org>

On (07/14/15 16:03), Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Sergey Senozhatsky has modified several destroy functions that can
> > now be called with NULL values.
> > 
> >  - kmem_cache_destroy()
> >  - mempool_destroy()
> >  - dma_pool_destroy()
> > 
> > Update checkpatch to warn when those functions are preceded by an if.
> > 
> > Update checkpatch to --fix all the calls too only when the code style
> > form is using leading tabs.
> > 
> > from:
> > 	if (foo)
> > 		<func>(foo);
> > to:
> > 	<func>(foo);
> 
> There's also zpool_destroy_pool() and zs_destroy_pool().  Did we decide
> they're not worth bothering about?

Correct. Those two are very unlikely will see any significant number
of users so, I think, we can drop the patches that touch zspool and
zsmalloc destructors.

	-ss