If usb_init_urb() is already testing for !urb, why
test it again? No doubt the compiler will probably
catch it if inlining ... but I think the best is
for usb_init_urb() to assume that urb is not NULL.
Let the caller make that sure.
Sorry if this is a dup ... I am catching up with
my mail ...
Iñaky Pérez-González -- Not speaking for Intel -- all opinions are my own
(and my fault)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/