linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/7] mtd: spi-nor: hisi-sfc: Simplify with scoped for each OF child loop

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <ad801501-cd9f-41f5-97b3-bf8b628d6e1d@linaro.org>
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2026 01:57:48 +0200
From: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir.zapolskiy@...aro.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@....qualcomm.com>,
 Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@...nel.org>,
 Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Cc: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
 Kamal Dasu <kamal.dasu@...adcom.com>,
 Broadcom internal kernel review list
 <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
 Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
 Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
 Harvey Hunt <harveyhuntnexus@...il.com>, Paul Cercueil
 <paul@...pouillou.net>, Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>,
 Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>, Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>,
 Michael Walle <mwalle@...nel.org>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
 Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com>,
 Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>, Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>,
 linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] mtd: spi-nor: hisi-sfc: Simplify with scoped for each
 OF child loop

On 1/3/26 14:38, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 02/01/2026 14:33, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
>> Hi Kyzystof,
>>
>> Thanks for the cleanup.
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 02 2026, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>
>>> Use scoped for-each loop when iterating over device nodes to make code a
>>> bit simpler.
>>
>> Nit: the commit message is a bit too dry. I had to go and look what the
>> difference between the two variants was. I could make an educated guess
>> by looking at the patch, but still.
> 
> Really? That's old and widely used syntax, replaced so many times and
> sorry, but really obvious.

The made conversion changes are not exactly the ones, which were asked to
be done.

Commit 34af4554fb0c ("of: Introduce for_each_*_child_of_node_scoped()
to automate of_node_put() handling") says it clearly:

     Note that, in the vast majority of cases, the _available_ form should be
     used and as code is converted to these scoped handers, we should confirm
     that any cases that do not check for available have a good reason not
     to.

So, likely this and many other similar changes miss information in their
commit messages, why for_each_available_child_of_node_scoped() form is
inapplicable, thus it still could be improved.

> We should not explain core kernel API in commit msgs, except maybe first
> months of usage.
> 
>>
>> If you end up doing a v2, a one-liner explanation of the difference
>> between the two loop variants would be nice to have.
> 

-- 
Best wishes,
Vladimir