[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <km4v4ql7l7fra46c6ptekgfli5lfw557edim6w4klu7tn23jvq@grgvfyeyq2i4>
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2025 14:01:52 -0300
From: Tomas Borquez <tomasborquez13@...il.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>, David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>,
Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>, Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] staging: iio: ad9832: convert to guard(mutex)
On Wed, Dec 31, 2025 at 12:50:54AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 30, 2025 at 10:35 PM Tomas Borquez <tomasborquez13@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > Use guard(mutex) for cleaner lock handling and simpler error paths.
>
> ...
>
> Don't remember if it was in the previous rounds of review or somewhere
> else, but Jonathan (? IIRC) suggestd to use
>
> ret = foo(...);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> break;
> ...
> return len;
You are right, I should have sticked to that one since anyways I ended
up using that pattern on patch 5.
> However, this one just duplicates what is already in use. Have you
> checked the bloat-o-meter before and after and see if there is any
> difference in the compiled object file?
Jonathan's is better by 7 delta, so I'll stick with his
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists