[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wigZt6kVkY0HU1j_LJ5H1KzwPiYnwwk6CbqXqT=sGenjg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 13:29:11 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] gpio: updates for v6.6
On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 at 04:43, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> wrote:
>
> Driver improvements:
> - use autopointers and guards from cleanup.h in gpio-sim
So I've pulled this, but I'm not entirely convinced some of this was a cleanup.
That gpio_sim_config_make_device_group() change is "interesting". Doing
return &no_free_ptr(dev)->group;
looks a bit crazy. My first reaction to it was 'that can't be right".
It _is_ right, but I'm not convinced that getting rid of one kfree()
call in the error path above it is worth that kind of semantic
complexity.
I guess we'll get more used to this - and it will look a bit less
crazy in the process - but I did want to just note that I'm not
entirely convinced we should encourage things like this.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists