netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/13] net: Simplified with scoped function

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: <b5b7346d-83ea-846a-1187-3d39ee5177f3@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 11:26:59 +0800
From: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC: <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>, <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 00/13] net: Simplified with scoped function



On 2024/8/28 22:32, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 11:23:30AM +0800, Jinjie Ruan wrote:
>> Simplify with scoped for each OF child loop and __free(), as well as
>> dev_err_probe().
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Subject prefix: next -> net-next.
>> - Split __free() from scoped for each OF child loop clean.
>> - Fix use of_node_put() instead of __free() for the 5th patch.
> 
> I personally think all these __free() are ugly and magical. Can it
> somehow be made part of of_get_child_by_name()? Add an
> of_get_child_by_name_func_ref() which holds a reference to the node
> for the scope of the function?

Yes, that is a good idea, and the __free() doesn't look as readable as
or_each_*child_of_node_scoped().

> 
> for_each_available_child_of_node_scoped() is fine. Once you have fixed
> all the reverse christmas tree, please submit them. But i would like
> to see alternatives to __free(), once which are less ugly.

Thank you!

> 
> 	Andrew
> 
> ---
> pw-bot: cr
>