From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B27C1388F052 for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 17:12:25 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org B27C1388F052 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark@simark.ca Received: from [172.16.0.95] (192-222-181-218.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.181.218]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 30BC61E072; Thu, 21 May 2020 13:12:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb: remove unnecessary NULL checks before xfree To: Tom Tromey , Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches Cc: Simon Marchi References: <20200521151032.3116197-1-simon.marchi@efficios.com> <87r1vd71mg.fsf@tromey.com> From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: <63788603-81b4-89fc-717a-a555e9f6d5f6@simark.ca> Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 13:12:24 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87r1vd71mg.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: tl Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 17:12:26 -0000 On 2020-05-21 11:23 a.m., Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches writes: > > Simon> This patch removes the unnecessary NULL checks before calls to xfree. > Simon> They are unnecessary because xfree already does a NULL check. Since > Simon> free is supposed to handle NULL values correctly, the NULL check in > Simon> xfree itself is also questionable, but I've left it there for now. > > Looks good. I think it's fine to remove the one from xfree as well. > > Note this same thing applies to delete. I don't know whether we have > instances of that. I've spotted some, but I won't change them as part of this patch, as I was focussing on xfree. Thanks to you and Pedro for reviewing, I'll push the patch. Simon