linux-kernel - Re: [v2] Input: iqs269a - Use scope-based resource management in iqs269_parse

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 10:59:17 -0800
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc: Jeff LaBundy <jeff@...undy.com>, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	Mattijs Korpershoek <mkorpershoek@...libre.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
	ye xingchen <ye.xingchen@....com.cn>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [v2] Input: iqs269a - Use scope-based resource management in
 iqs269_parse_chan()

On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 06:48:58PM +0100, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > The extra curly braces are absolutely not needed. The for loop's body
> > already defines scope, __cleanup()s should be called at the end of the body.
> 
> I present an other development opinion here.
> I got the impression that the required scope should be smaller for
> the adjusted local variable “ev_node” (according to the previous function implementation).
> 
> Otherwise:
> How do you think about to move any source code part from the loop
> into a separate function?

No, it should simply look like this:


diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/iqs269a.c b/drivers/input/misc/iqs269a.c
index cd14ff9f57cf..98119c48c65f 100644
--- a/drivers/input/misc/iqs269a.c
+++ b/drivers/input/misc/iqs269a.c
@@ -557,7 +557,6 @@ static int iqs269_parse_chan(struct iqs269_private *iqs269,
 			     const struct fwnode_handle *ch_node)
 {
 	struct i2c_client *client = iqs269->client;
-	struct fwnode_handle *ev_node;
 	struct iqs269_ch_reg *ch_reg;
 	u16 engine_a, engine_b;
 	unsigned int reg, val;
@@ -734,8 +733,9 @@ static int iqs269_parse_chan(struct iqs269_private *iqs269,
 	}
 
 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(iqs269_events); i++) {
-		ev_node = fwnode_get_named_child_node(ch_node,
-						      iqs269_events[i].name);
+		struct fwnode_handle *ev_node __free(fwnode_handle) =
+			fwnode_get_named_child_node(ch_node,
+						    iqs269_events[i].name);
 		if (!ev_node)
 			continue;
 
@@ -744,7 +744,6 @@ static int iqs269_parse_chan(struct iqs269_private *iqs269,
 				dev_err(&client->dev,
 					"Invalid channel %u threshold: %u\n",
 					reg, val);
-				fwnode_handle_put(ev_node);
 				return -EINVAL;
 			}
 
@@ -758,7 +757,6 @@ static int iqs269_parse_chan(struct iqs269_private *iqs269,
 				dev_err(&client->dev,
 					"Invalid channel %u hysteresis: %u\n",
 					reg, val);
-				fwnode_handle_put(ev_node);
 				return -EINVAL;
 			}
 
@@ -774,7 +772,6 @@ static int iqs269_parse_chan(struct iqs269_private *iqs269,
 		}
 
 		error = fwnode_property_read_u32(ev_node, "linux,code", &val);
-		fwnode_handle_put(ev_node);
 		if (error == -EINVAL) {
 			continue;
 		} else if (error) {

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry