[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251028165643.7ae07efd@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2025 16:56:43 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>
Cc: robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
claudiu.manoil@....com, vladimir.oltean@....com, xiaoning.wang@....com,
Frank.Li@....com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, richardcochran@...il.com,
imx@...ts.linux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 4/6] net: enetc: add ptp timer binding
support for i.MX94
On Mon, 27 Oct 2025 09:45:01 +0800 Wei Fang wrote:
> + struct device_node *timer_np __free(device_node) = NULL;
Please go back to the code from v2.
Quoting documentation:
Using device-managed and cleanup.h constructs
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Netdev remains skeptical about promises of all "auto-cleanup" APIs,
including even ``devm_`` helpers, historically. They are not the preferred
style of implementation, merely an acceptable one.
Use of ``guard()`` is discouraged within any function longer than 20 lines,
``scoped_guard()`` is considered more readable. Using normal lock/unlock is
still (weakly) preferred.
Low level cleanup constructs (such as ``__free()``) can be used when building
APIs and helpers, especially scoped iterators. However, direct use of
``__free()`` within networking core and drivers is discouraged.
Similar guidance applies to declaring variables mid-function.
See: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html#using-device-managed-and-cleanup-h-constructs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists