Note - we should not be doing pointer checks on internal functions - only those that are part of the public API.

I took a glance at the proposed commit and I see it is adding checks to internal routines. This is inefficient and unnecessary - as the value should have been already checked in the public API it was called from. It is also my understanding that code standards only require it on externally-called functions.

Note - we should not be doing pointer checks on internal functions - only those that are part of the public API.

I took a glance at the proposed commit and I see it is adding checks to internal routines. This is inefficient and unnecessary - as the value should have been already checked in the public API it was called from. It is also my understanding that code standards only require it on externally-called functions.

Concur. The coding standard applies to all the APIs.

After removing all the internal checks this pull request is just a bunch of formatting fixes and changing comments to all use the same terminology.

Can you add the BUGCHECKs in the void public APIs? That would close out the issue.

Can you add the BUGCHECKs in the void public APIs? That would close out the issue.

Done

CCB:2021-01-27 APPROVED with CHANGES

OS_ForEachObjectType argument is allowed to be null because it's a passthrough; @jphickey Check documentation for the function to double check this it is well-explained