[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <75a33776-cd69-edba-8d20-ffcf99ca1879@web.de>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2020 07:04:37 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@....edu.cn>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org
Cc: kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@...hat.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>, Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>
Subject: Re: drm/nouveau/clk/gm20b: Understanding challenges around
gm20b_clk_new()
> Ben has explained this problem:
> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1249592/
> Since the caller will check "pclk" on failure, we don't need to free
> "clk" in gm20b_clk_new() and I think this patch is no longer needed.
* I am curious if it can become easier to see the relationships for
these variables according to mentioned “destructor” calls.
* Did you notice opportunities to improve source code analysis
(or software documentation) accordingly?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists