Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2 of 3] xenpaging: Fix-up xenpaging tool code

[Patrick Colp <pjcolp@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 28 July 2010 10:00, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Patrick Colp writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH 2 of 3] xenpaging: Fix-up xenpaging 
> tool code"):
>> Â err:
>> - Â Âif ( paging->bitmap )
>> - Â Â Â Âfree(paging->bitmap);
>> - Â Âif ( paging->platform_info )
>> - Â Â Â Âfree(paging->platform_info);
>> Â Â Âif ( paging )
>> + Â Â{
>> + Â Â Â Âif ( paging->bitmap )
>> + Â Â Â Â Â Âfree(paging->bitmap);
>
> While you're doing this, why not replace
>
>>-+ Â Â Â Âif ( paging->bitmap )
>>-+ Â Â Â Â Â Âfree(paging->bitmap);
> with
>
>>++ Â Â Â Âfree(paging->bitmap);
>
> since free(0) is legal and a no-op ?

Could do, but free(0) isn't exactly a no-op. free() does a check to
see if the pointer passed was 0. So it doesn't really make much
difference if I do the check or let it do the check. I can easily
change the code to just do free(paging->bitmap) though, if that's the
preferred way to do it. Actually, I would argue my way is better since
in the case of a NULL pointer, the free function isn't called at all,
which saves a bunch of cycles.


Patrick

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel