netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 06/13] net: phy: Use for_each_available_child_of_node

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: <20240828134425.000042c7@Huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 13:44:25 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>
CC: <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>, <andrew@...n.ch>, <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	<olteanv@...il.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	<kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>, <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	<alsi@...g-olufsen.dk>, <justin.chen@...adcom.com>,
	<sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>, <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
	<joabreu@...opsys.com>, <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>, <wens@...e.org>,
	<jernej.skrabec@...il.com>, <samuel@...lland.org>, <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	<linux@...linux.org.uk>, <ansuelsmth@...il.com>,
	<UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev>,
	<linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>, <krzk@...nel.org>,
	<jic23@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 06/13] net: phy: Use
 for_each_available_child_of_node_scoped()

On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 11:23:36 +0800
Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com> wrote:

> Avoid need to manually handle of_node_put() by using
> for_each_available_child_of_node_scoped(), which can simplfy code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>
Ah. I see Andrew mentioned he didn't like the __free change
hence you've only done this one. Fair enough I guess.

Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>

> ---
> - Split into 2 patches.
> ---
>  drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c | 5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
> index 243dae686992..560e338b307a 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
> @@ -3407,7 +3407,7 @@ static int of_phy_led(struct phy_device *phydev,
>  static int of_phy_leds(struct phy_device *phydev)
>  {
>  	struct device_node *node = phydev->mdio.dev.of_node;
> -	struct device_node *leds, *led;
> +	struct device_node *leds;
>  	int err;
>  
>  	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF_MDIO))
> @@ -3420,10 +3420,9 @@ static int of_phy_leds(struct phy_device *phydev)
>  	if (!leds)
>  		return 0;
>  
> -	for_each_available_child_of_node(leds, led) {
> +	for_each_available_child_of_node_scoped(leds, led) {
>  		err = of_phy_led(phydev, led);
>  		if (err) {
> -			of_node_put(led);
>  			of_node_put(leds);
>  			phy_leds_unregister(phydev);
>  			return err;