Re: [cocci] [PATCH 15/61] trace: Prefer IS_ERR_OR_NULL over manual NULL check

Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]> Wed, 11 Mar 2026 15:06:07 +0100
Newsgroups fr.inria.cocci,dev.linux.lists.dm-devel,dev.linux.lists.gfs2,dev.linux.lists.iommu,dev.linux.lists.ntfs3,dev.linux.lists.sched-ext,dev.linux.lists.v9fs,org.freedesktop.lists.amd-gfx,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.freedesktop.lists.intel-gfx,org.infradead.lists.linux-mtd,org.infradead.lists.linux-phy,org.infradead.lists.linux-rockchip,org.kernel.vger.bpf,org.kernel.vger.ceph-devel,org.kernel.vger.kvm,org.kernel.vger.linux-block,org.kernel.vger.linux-bluetooth,org.kernel.vger.linux-btrfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-cifs,org.kernel.vger.linux-clk,org.kernel.vger.linux-ext4,org.kernel.vger.linux-fsdevel,org.kernel.vger.linux-gpio,org.kernel.vger.linux-hyperv,org.kernel.vger.linux-input,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-leds,org.kernel.vger.linux-media,org.kernel.vger.linux-mips,org.kernel.vger.linux-modules,org.kernel.vger.linux-nfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-omap,org.kernel.vger.linux-pm,org.kernel.vger.linux-s390,org.kernel.vger.linux-scsi,org.kernel.vger.linux-sctp,org.kernel.vger.linux-security-module,org.kernel.vger.linux-sh,org.kernel.vger.linux-sound,org.kernel.vger.linux-trace-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-usb,org.kernel.vger.linux-wireless,org.kernel.vger.netdev,org.kernel.vger.target-devel,org.kvack.linux-mm,org.osuosl.intel-wired-lan,org.ozlabs.lists.linux-erofs
Message-ID <CAMuHMdX4kRGLaKMzPuhS1Pmxh609eiqQW-cAS_jWBBbt-vE6SA@mail.gmail.com> 
Hi Steven,

On Wed, 11 Mar 2026 at 15:03, Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Mar 2026 14:13:32 +0900
> Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hmm, now IS_ERR_OR_NULL() is an inline function, so it is safe.
> > But if you want to use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() here, it will be better something like
> >
> > node = rhashtable_walk_next(&iter);
> > while (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(node)) {
> >       fprobe_remove_node_in_module(mod, node, &alist);
> >       node = rhashtable_walk_next(&iter);
> > }
>
> But now you need to have a duplicate code in order to acquire "node"
>
> I think the patch just makes the code worse.

Obviously we need a new for_each_*() helper hiding all the gory internals?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds