On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 08:20:25AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > Document what was discussed multiple times on list and various > virtual / in-person conversations. guard() being okay in functions > <= 20 LoC is my own invention. If the function is trivial it should > be fine, but feel free to disagree :) > > Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > CC: andrew@xxxxxxx > CC: corbet@xxxxxxx > CC: linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > --- > Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst > index fe8616397d63..ccd6c96a169b 100644 > --- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst > +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst > @@ -392,6 +392,22 @@ When working in existing code which uses nonstandard formatting make > your code follow the most recent guidelines, so that eventually all code > in the domain of netdev is in the preferred format. > > +Using device-managed and cleanup.h constructs > +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > + > +Netdev remains skeptical about promises of all "auto-cleanup" APIs, > +including even ``devm_`` helpers, historically. They are not the preferred > +style of implementation, merely an acceptable one. > + > +Use of ``guard()`` is discouraged within any function longer than 20 lines, > +``scoped_guard()`` is considered more readable. Using normal lock/unlock is > +still (weakly) preferred. > + > +Low level cleanup constructs (such as ``__free()``) can be used when building > +APIs and helpers, especially scoped interators. However, direct use of Sorry to nit-pick: iterators > +``__free()`` within networking core and drivers is discouraged. > +Similar guidance applies to declaring variables mid-function. > + > Resending after review > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > -- > 2.46.0 > >
