Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:22:30 -0500 From: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> To: Benjamin Kaduk <bjkfbsd@gmail.com> Cc: "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r277908 - head/share/man/man9 Message-ID: <CAPyFy2BWrwqt16VwSw8UnAOLBppu_=Df-m9eYRf%2B-q40ed2nwA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAJ5_RoBV4j73unUKT=maie=Ki=GfRmQLnQc=B1kwEBfdY_fW2w@mail.gmail.com> References: <201501300317.t0U3H8nL020407@svn.freebsd.org> <CAJ5_RoBV4j73unUKT=maie=Ki=GfRmQLnQc=B1kwEBfdY_fW2w@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 29 January 2015 at 22:34, Benjamin Kaduk <bjkfbsd@gmail.com> wrote: > > Wouldn't it be like a two-line patch to change contigfree(9) to permit NULL > as an argument? It would. > Would it be better to do that? Perhaps, although contigmalloc / contigfree have a smallish set of distinct use cases and existing code does not expect it can pass NULL. I didn't want to add the test just for consistency with free().
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPyFy2BWrwqt16VwSw8UnAOLBppu_=Df-m9eYRf%2B-q40ed2nwA>