[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20251230110441.1205454-1-zilin@seu.edu.cn>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2025 11:04:41 +0000
From: Zilin Guan <zilin@....edu.cn>
To: markus.elfring@....de
Cc: andrew+netdev@...n.ch,
davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com,
jianhao.xu@....edu.cn,
johannes@...solutions.net,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
kuba@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
loic.poulain@....qualcomm.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com,
ryazanov.s.a@...il.com,
zilin@....edu.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: wwan: iosm: Fix memory leak in ipc_mux_deinit()
On Tue, Dec 30, 2025 at 10:42:22AM+0100, Markus Elfring wrote:
> Do you tend to interpret such information still as the beginning
> of the function implementation?
> ...
> Would the mentioned variable be relevant only for an additional if branch?
I prefer to strictly follow the existing coding style of the current file,
where all local variables are declared at the top of the function. I do
not wish to mix different declaration styles in this patch.
If you believe the file should be converted to C99 style, that would be
better handled in a separate cleanup patch for the entire file, rather
than mixing it into this bug fix.
Regards,
Zilin Guan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists