Re: Unnecessary pointer-NULL checks in pgp-pgsql.c
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Unnecessary pointer-NULL checks in pgp-pgsql.c |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmobLEbhP4z7N8vb939Oyyb8EWOKFWDL3o2hO3m40S4YwPg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Unnecessary pointer-NULL checks in pgp-pgsql.c (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Unnecessary pointer-NULL checks in pgp-pgsql.c
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 9:14 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: > Coverity is pointing out that we are doing pointer-NULL checks on > things that cannot be NULL in decrypt_internal(): > out: > - if (src) > - mbuf_free(src); > - if (ctx) > - pgp_free(ctx); > + Assert(ctx != NULL && src != NULL && dst != NULL); > + mbuf_free(src); > + pgp_free(ctx); > > if (err) > { > px_set_debug_handler(NULL); > - if (dst) > - mbuf_free(dst); > + mbuf_free(dst); > > src, dst and ctx are created respectively from mbuf_create_from_data, > mbuf_create and pgp_init which never return NULL and they are palloc'd > all the time. I think that we could simplify things with the patch > attached, note that I added an assertion for correctness but I don't > really think that it is much necessary. Yeah, I'd drop the assertion. Also, how about changing things around slightly so that we lose the goto-label construct? There's only one goto, and its only about 6 lines before the label, so we could just flip the sense of the if-test and put the code that gets skipped inside the if-block. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: