On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 10:03 AM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 9:23 AM Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > for (p = &table->table[0]; p->key; p++) { > > > + struct gpio_device *gdev __free(gpio_device_put) = NULL; > > > > > + gdev = gpio_device_find_by_label(p->key); > > > + if (!gdev) { > > > > I haven't got the fix for gpio-sim, shouldn't we have the same here, i.e. > > definition being done together with the assignment when __free() is in use? > > It should but I only got yelled at by Linus under the gpio-sim patch > after I sent this one. That happens, it's all new. I guess ideally we should patch checkpatch to just moan about this, I wonder how hard that could be (I've only patched it once in my life...) Yours, Linus Walleij