[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200621085755.GA477536@splinter>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2020 11:57:55 +0300
From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
To: Vadym Kochan <vadym.kochan@...ision.eu>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Oleksandr Mazur <oleksandr.mazur@...ision.eu>,
Serhiy Boiko <serhiy.boiko@...ision.eu>,
Serhiy Pshyk <serhiy.pshyk@...ision.eu>,
Volodymyr Mytnyk <volodymyr.mytnyk@...ision.eu>,
Taras Chornyi <taras.chornyi@...ision.eu>,
Andrii Savka <andrii.savka@...ision.eu>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mickey Rachamim <mickeyr@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next 1/6] net: marvell: prestera: Add driver for Prestera
family ASIC devices
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 03:56:39PM +0300, Vadym Kochan wrote:
> But it will look same as prestera_destroy_ports(), do you think
> this is not a problem to have a same logic doubled ?
No, error paths of init() usually share logic with fini(). The benefits
of being consistent, always having init() followed by fini() and making
sure they are symmetric, out-weigh the benefit of saving a few lines of
code.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists