[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZQwQnA/W1TZDJivM@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2023 12:45:00 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] gpio: sim: fix an invalid __free() usage
On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 01:12:16AM -0700, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 15:43:47 +0200, Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> said:
> > On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 09:32:53AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
...
> > As for the material to be backported it's fine, but I'm wondering if we
> > actually can add the entries in a sorted manner, so we would need the exact
> > what I mentioned in previous review round, just search backwards to the first
> > satisfying entry. I don't believe the adding an entry to the list is a
> > hot-path, so would be fine to call list_sort().
>
> Given the need for the callback function, this would result in bigger code.
Is it a problem?
On the below I kinda agree.
> Also calling:
>
> list_add_tail();
> list_sort();
>
> is not very elegant. I would possibly go for adding list_add_sorted() but
> that's a separate change for the future.
Note, we do this for the GPIO bases already.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists